1921-03-17

OFFICIAL REPORT


Volume I:: Pages 1-1000	Volume II: Pages 1001-2026


Volume III:: Pages 2027-3003	Volume IV: Pages 3005-4040


Volume V:: Pages 4041-4580



VOLUME CXLVII


[Stage Direction]
House of Commons Hetmles
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, March 17, 1921

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MICHAEL STEELE (South Perth) presented the first report of the Select Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills.

[Stage Direction]
Re-organization of the Department of Public Printing and Stationery.-Right Hon. Sir George Foster.
Conditions in the Department of Printing and Stationery; supplementary report.- Right Hon. Sir George Foster.

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the House that I have received the resignation of Sir Herbert B. Ames as member for the electoral district of St. Antoine, Montreal. I have accordingly issued my warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer to make out a new writ of election for the said electoral district.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: 1.	Has .'the Government paid to the Dominion Canners Company certain sums of money for goods bought on behalf of Greece and Roumania?
2.	If so, (a) for what amount, (b) what date, (c) what is the nature of these goods'


Right Hon. Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


TRADE AGENTS IN UNITED STATES
Mr. BUCHANAN:: 1.	Has it been recommended to the Government that trade agents should be appointed in different sections of the United States in order to develop an export trade with that country?
2.	If so, does the Government intend to act favourably on the proposal.


Right Hon.   S@: 1	and 2. Previous to the outbreak of the war, a more general extension of Canadian trade agencies had been under consideration but was then postponed owing to the general disorganization due to the war. The matter has since been taken up and is now under advisement by the Department. When a decision has been finally reached, the intention of the Government will be made known.


DOMINION NOTE CIRCULATION
Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough):: 1.	What was the Dominion note circulation on the 31st of March, 1914?
2.	What is it now?


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	$117,795,718.53.
2.	February 28,1921, $290,194,519.92. Of this total $137,115,075 is against approved securities under the provisions of the Finance Act.


CREDIT TO BELGIUM
Mr. PACAUD:: 1.	Is the credit of 125,000,000 that was granted to Belgium on the 21st of March, 1919, still in force?
2.	If not, at whose request and for what reason was it cancelled?
3.	Is the Government aware that the Belgian Government would like to avail itself of such a credit to purchase In Canada our Canadian wheat?
4.	If so, does the Canadian Government intend to renew such a credit?


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	No.
2.	Under the agreement of March 21st, 1919, purchases were to be made before the thirty-first day of December, 1919, the unemployed portion of the credit at that date to be cancelled.
3.	No.
4.	Answered by No. 3.
Mr. W. N. TILLEY, K.C.


Mr. BROUILLARD:: .
1. Up-on wh-ose recommendation was W. N. Tilley, K.C., appointed Counsel for the Government of Canada on the arbitration proceedings between the Dominion of Canada and the Grand Trunk Railway Company?
2. What is his remuneration in such services?


Right Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	Mr. Tilly was retained upon the responsibility of the Government.
2.	Retainer, $10,000; $400 per day for days engaged out of Toronto; $100 per day for days in Toronto.


MR. E. F. NEWCOMBE, BARRISTER
Mr. BROTJILLARD:: 1.	Is E. F. Newcom'be, barrister, Ottawa, employed by the Government with the arbitration proceedings between the Dominion of Canada and the Grand Trunk Railway Company?
2.	If so, what is his position and upon whose recommendation was he appointed?
3.	What is his remuneration?
4.	Is he a son of the Deputy Minister of Justice?
5.	Is the Government aware that he was only admitted to practice law within the past two years?
6.	What are his special qualifications for this work?
7.	Has he received any other work from the Department of Justice?
8.	If so, upon whose recommendation, and what was the kind of work given him and how much has he earned to date for services other than connected with the Grand Trunk Railway arbitration?


Right Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	He was retained by Mr. W. N. Tilley, K.C., leading counsel for the Dominion, who, when he was retained, stipulated the right to select junior counsel.
3.	$30 per day for each day upon which he is exclusively engaged upon the work of the arbitration.
4.	Yes.
5.	No. He was admitted in 1916.
6.	The Government is advised that his qualifications are excellent.
7.	Yes.
8.	Upon the responsibility of the department; litigated matters; earnings according to departmental record $570.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS

Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough):: 1.	Was suction dredge Tornado employed in dredging in Courtney Bay or St. John Harbour, N.B., during the year 1920?
2.	If so, who is the owner?
3.	Whre was the dredge built?
4.	At what date did she arrive at St. John?
5.	From what port did she sail?
6.	What was the total expenditure to December 31st, 1920, in connection with the work done by this dredge?
7.	Were certain pontoons lost at the time that said dredge was brought to St. John?
8.	If so, were the same recovered?
9.	Where is the dredge Tornado now?
[Mir. Btrouillhrd.]


Mr. EDWARDS:: 1.	What were the amounts appropriated for the National Gallery of Canada from April 1, 19116, to April 1, 1921?
2.	How were these appropriations expended?
3.	Who is in charge of the National Gallery, when was he appointed, at what salary and what is his present salary?
4.	How many officials are on the staff at the Gallery, what are their names, dates of appointment and respective salaries?
5.	What officials on the Gallery staff have been drawing their salaries while the Gallery has been closed and at what work were they employed?
6.	When was the National Gallery closed, why, and when will it be re-opened?



EASTER ADJOURNMENT

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Prime Minister) moved.
That when this House adjourns on Wednesday, the 23rd instant, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, the 29th instant.
Motion agreed to.
WEDNESDAY EVENING SITTINGS Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN moved:
That on Wednesday, the 30th instant, and on all subsequent Wednesdays to the end of the session, the House shall meet at Three o'clock, p.m., and that the sitting on such days shall, in every respect, be under the same rules provided for other days.
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: May I ask my right hon. friend if the motion proposes to do away with the Wednesday evening adjournments?


Mr. MEIGHEN:: Yes. I am moving the resolution at about the usual time of the session, but I believe that on the first coming up of the motion it is not usual to press it if it is felt that the delay of another week would be convenient to hon. gentlemen on either side. However, the Government would like to have the motion passed.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would like to suggest to the Prime Minister that he should follow the custom of previous years, unless there is some very strong reason why it should be departed from.


Arthur Meighen: It will be observed that the motion does not propose to take Wednesday as a Government day, what is proposed is simply to sit for the entire day on Wednesday. If the hon. gentleman would prefer I will have the motion provide for another week's delay and follow it possibly by a motion to take Wednesday as a Government day later.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The motion stands.



TRADE WITH RUSSIA

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. CHARLES MURPHY (Russell):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the announcement that a trade agreement has been entered into between the Government of Great Britain and the Soviet Government of Russia, may I inquire if this Government has taken or is about to take any steps to promote trade between Canada and Russia?


Right Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, no particular steps have been taken of late. The situation as regards Russia and Canada is simply this-that any Russian subject has a perfect right to come to Canada to make purchases and provide for payment to the Canadians from whom he makes purchases; and Canadians have a perfect right to trade with Russian subjects. Notwithstanding the trade commissions that we sent to Russia, conditions in that country entirely apart from general world conditions, are not favourable to Canadian trade; but since the Armistice there has been no embargo on trade relations between the two countries.


Mr. J. H. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guysborough) :: Mr. Speaker, do the terms of the treaty which has been completed between Great Britain and Russia apply to Canada?


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: The treaty between Great Britain and the Soviet authorities has been concluded entirely irrespective of the self-governing dominions.


Charles Murphy: May I ask the right hon. gentleman if the conditions in Russia to which he referred militate against Canada to any greater degree than they do against Great Britain?


George Green Foster: The conditions in Russia are equally unfortunate for both countries. They arise from the confused state of affairs in Russia itself and from the almost complete breakdown of transportation facilities there; those are the special conditions. Then, of course, there is the general trade condition of the world in the matter of exchange and credits.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. F. S. CAHILL (Pontiac) :: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Reid), in view
64J
of his statement regarding the resolution of the hon. member for Quebec West (Mr,, Parent), if it is the policy of the Government that correspondence between the officers of the Canadian National Railways will not be produced in this House when asked for?


Hon. J. D. REID (Minister of Railways and Canals):: Mr. Speaker, the answer I gave to the hon. member (Mr. Parent) was that the correspondence he asked for was not in the possession of the Government, and of course I could not produce it.


Frank S. Cahill: I would ask the minister whether he refuses to produce the correspondence? The matter has to do with his department.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Shelburne and Queen's):: Does my hon. friend mean to imply that transactions relating to the Canadian National railways are not to be brought to the notice of this House, and that an hon. member cannot properly ask, subject to the usual rule regarding confidential matters, to have brought before Parliament any correspondence relating to any public matter in the Dominion of Canada?


Arthur Meighen: This is a subject that has come up very frequently, and the rule adopted by Parliament is, I think, well known. The board of directors of the National railways operate the system just as the board of directors of any other railway whose stock is not owned by the Government operate their system. The correspondence of the board of directors is in the possession of the National Railways, and it has not been the practice that this Government should ask that all matters of operation be submitted to it or to this House for review; they come before the House in the usual way in the annual report of the board of directors. That is the policy which has been adopted and which now prevails.


William Stevens Fielding: Subject to the general rule that confidential documents cannot in the public interest be produced, which we admit readily, does my right hon. friend imply that because the Canadian National Railways take the form of a company, in which the people of Canada are the owners of all the stock, therefore we cannot ask for papers relating to the transactions of that vast enterprise in which the people's money is invested?


Arthur Meighen: This House has review of the work of the enterprise of course. But correspondence in connection with the operation of the road between the board of directors and anybody concerned is not in the possession of the Government, and is not the same at all as correspondence between departments of Government and others, which, of course, must be brought down upon resolution of this House. It has not been the practice, nor do I know how we can have such a thing as independent non-political operation of the road if the correspondence of the Canadian National system is to be produced. It is impossible. You must choose between one way and the other


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Does my right hon. friend recognize no obligations, by virtue of these being government-owned railways, to produce any correspondence as distinct from correspondence of a privately-owned corporation? Is there no obligation on the Government to produce any correspondence relating to the Canadian National railways?


Arthur Meighen: I have answered that as fully as I can. The question is not removed from difficulty, I admit. The Government of the country is the owner of the stock of the road. But if any matter connected with operation is, by means of the production of correspondence, to be brought before this Parliament for review, that means direct political control of the road, and that we are determined to avoid.




[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. GEORGE PARENT (Quebec West):: May I ask the Minister of Railways if his department has anything to do with the cancellation of certain trains on the Canadian National railways?


John Dowsley Reid: The Department of Railways and Canals has nothing whatever to do with the cancellation of trains or in fact with anything connected with the operation of the road.


Georges Parent: I wanted to find out from the minister, because on February 28 he answered that the Government had something to do with the cancellation of trains and was in possession-


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: On the Orders of the Day there can be no cross-questioning of

ministers; any answer received must be accepted.


Mr. JACQUES BUREAU (Three Rivers) :: Are the Canadian National railways operated under the Canadian National Railways Act passed by this Parliament some years ago?


John Dowsley Reid: No, Mr. Speaker,
that Act has not yet been brought into force.



SUPPLY-RULE 17C

[Stage Direction]
On the Order being called for the House to go into Committee of Supply.
["I hope the minister does not desire to go further to-night. We on this side of the House have been giving him all the help we can. There is now only half an hour left of St. Patrick's day, and certainly my right hon. friend the Minister of Justice should not be kept here any later.\nProgress reported.\nOn motion of the Right Hon. C. J. Doherty the House adjourned at 11.25 p.m.\nFriday, March 18. 1921\t."]
Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Under Rule 17c the mere calling of this order makes it necessary for the Speaker to leave the Chair without question put, but the Minister^ of Railways and Canals (Mr. Reid) has intimated to me that he would prefer to make his railway statement with the Speaker in the Chair. I therefore submit the question to the House, as to whether he shall have unanimous consent for the purpose of making his statement, following which, and complying with the rule, I shall leave the Chair.


Jacques Bureau: Is this a motion?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: No. It does not abrogate the rule in any way.	,


Mr. CRERAR:: Is this a statement by the Minister of Railways preliminary to the introduction of his estimates?


John Dowsley Reid: This is my annual statement in connection with the National Railways showing the results of operation for the year 1920.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. minister should have leave to make his statement?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried. CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS



John Dowsley Reid: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the Chair and the House is in Committee of Supply, I wish to submit my annual statement in connection with the Canadian National railways. I wish to follow the usual custom and make a statement in connection with the operation of our Canadian government-owned and controlled railway systems for the year 1920. The statement I intend to submit is compiled from statistical information which I will

submit to the House before I close, and which was supplied me by the Board of Management who have charge of the operation of the National Railway system. Before going into the matter it would be well perhaps to explain how the operation of our National Railway system is being carried on. When the Government took over the Canadian Northern system and connected it up with the Intercolonial and Transcontinental railways, a policy had to be decided on as to how the roads would be managed, the Prime Minister of Canada, Sir Robert Borden, announced to the House and to the public what that policy would be. His announcement appears in Hansard, of the session of 1918, May 15, page 1999, when, speaking of the management of these railways, he laid this down as his policy.
As to the immediate future, I have already said that we do not intend to operate the Canadian Northern Railway system directly under a department of the Government; it is our intention to operate it for the present through the corporate machinery by which it has been operated in the past. There will be a reconstituted board of directors. We shall endeavour to get the best men we can and we shall not interfere with them. We shall leave the administration and operation of that road to be carried on absolutely under that Board of directors and we shall use every means available to the Government (and if necessary, we shall come t" Parliament for that purpose) in order that anything like political influence, political patronage, or political interference-I am using the word political in its narrower sense-shall be absolutely eliminated from the administration of that road.
That was the policy laid down by the Prime Minister, and in accordance with it a board was constituted and has been in charge of the management of Canadian National railways from its organization up to the present time, and the operation has been carried on quite independent of the Department of Railways and Canals.
I regret they were not able to submit a statement as satisfactory as I would like. A year ago I announced the deficit for 1919 as $47,993,312. When final figures were available the actual loss was found to have been $48,242,536


William Stevens Fielding: Does that mean in
operation only?


John Dowsley Reid: No, that is operation
and fixed charges. My statement explains these matters in detail. After I get through, if there are any questions I shall be glad to answer them.
When I made my annual statement of the operation of these roads a year ago I believed from discussions I had with the management I would be able to advise the
House this year that the deficit of 1919 had been reduced in 1920. Instead of a reduction I must inform the House that the loss in operation alone for the year ending December 31st, 1920, is much larger, and is as follows:
Canadian Northern	$16,258,579 80
Canadian Government	 10,449,876 43
Total operating deficit of the
Canadian National Railways: 26,708,456 23 To which we add the operating deficit of the Grand Trunk Pacific, which since Aug. 23rd last has been under management of the Canadian National Board, amounting to	 10,134,513 94
Making a total operating deficit
of	$36,842,970	17To this must be added the interest on bonds, etc., or what are called fixed charges and which have been	paid	or assumed	bythe Government, and	are	as	follows:-Canadian Northern	$24,155,988	48Grand Trunk Pacific	
9,332,776	23
Making the total deficit for operation and fixed charges.. $70,331,734 88
And this does not take into consideration any interest or fixed charges on Transcontinental or Intercolonial railways.
A Canadian National income credit, which will be shown in the statement of detail, reduces this sum to $69,593,441, which is the loss on operation and fixed charges for 1920, as against 48 millions in 1919. The management explain this increased loss of twenty millions chiefly by increased expenditures in pay-rolls and fuel.
In carrying on maintenance the management explain that the cost of many materials and supplies had increased very much over 1919. They also state that prices of equipment such as locomotives and cars advanced very greatly, all of which have added, and will continue to add, to the cost of operation. In a word, out of every dollar earned we had to pay 75 cents for operating wages, and 20 cents for fuel, leaving 5 cents for all other requirements which totalled 29 cents.
The mileage operated by the Canadian National management last year was as follows:-
Miles
Canadian-Northern	 9,859'78
Intercolonial Railway	and branches. 2,221'86
Transcontinental Railway	 2,006'58
Quebec & Saguenay and St. John &
Quebec	 234'07
Grand Trunk Pacific	 2,732'40
Total at end of 1920	 17,054'69

There were added during 1920, 140 miles To put in simplest form possible the by purchase of 236 miles on completion of earnings and operating expenses I submit of new construction.	the following statement:-


OROS8 EARNINGS
[Stage Direction]
1920		1919	
Canadian Northern System	. $66,695,398	80	$53,562,177	67Canadian Government	. 44,537,803	85	40,179,380	93Grand Trunk Pacific	. 14,408,549	66	11,294,617	87$125,141,752	31	$105,036,176	37OPERATING	EXPENSES	Canadian Northern System.. .. ,	. $ 82,953,978	60	$ 60,034,023	92Canadian Government	. 54,987,680	28	47,728,205	73Grand Trunk Pacific	. 24,543,063	60	17,587,567	37$162,484,722	48	$125,349,797	02OPERATING	DEFICIT	Canadian Northern System.. ..	. $16,258,579	80	$ 6,471,846	35Canadian Government	. 10,449,876	43	7,548,824	80Grand Trunk Pacific. . 	. 10,134,513	94	6,292,949	50$36,842,970	17	$20,313,620	65FIXED CHARGES	Canadian Northern:	Due public	. $13,933,69.5	36	$13,030,336	68Interest due Gov't	. 10,326,260	69	6,939,373	68Grand Trunk Pacific:	Due public	. 6,048,950	60	6,048,950	00Interest due Gov't	. 2,475,474	00	2,460,088	40Interest on Receiver's certificates for 1920. .	. SO'8,351	63	212,176	05$33,652,732.	28	$2.8,690,925	41TOTAL DEFICIT	( OPERATING	AND FIXED	CHARGES).	Canadian Northern System.. ..	. $40,578,535	85	$2 6,4 41i, 566	71Canadian Government	. 10,449,876	43	7,548,824	80Grand Trunk Pacific	. 19,467,290	17	15,014,163	95$70,495,702	45	$49,004,545	46
The figures for 1920, while subject to minor changes, are practically complete.
The management emphasize the fact that maintenance deferred during the war made it absolutely necessary to as far as possible overtake this work at increased cost during 1920 to protect the property. They also found it necessary to improve to a large extent terminal facilities and main lines if they were to take care of the traffic satisfactorily to the public and be in a position to compete with other lines operating throughout the country.
Coming now to the year 1921, or the Estimates before you, the management figure on considerable reduction in the deficit in operation owing to curtailment of train services, reduction of maintenance forces and other economies. They also expect a re-adjustment in the price of materials, also in the wage schedules and working conditions, which should have a 
substantial effect in reduction of operating costs. The Estimates as submitted to the House were those submitted by the officials of the Canadian National railway, and in detail show the following for 1921:
Loss on Canadian Northern, including fixed charges	 $23,074,847
Canadian Government Railway,
operating deficit	 7,000,000
Grand Trunk Pacific, deficit on
operation and fixed charges. . . .	19,817,873
[Stage Direction]
To this should be added $11,000,000 interest payable to the Finance Department for advances made to the Canadian Northern system by the Dominion Government, or a total of	 $60,822,720
The votes passed by Parliament last session in order to acquire additional rolling stock and motive power to enable the system to properly handle its proportion of the traffic of the country was expended in the purchase of the following equipment:

[Stage Direction]
20 Medium Pacific, from Montreal Locomotive Works.
10 Heavy Pacific, from Montreal Locomotive Works.
25 Sante Pe, from Montreal Locomotive Works.
20 Switchers, from Canadian Locomotive Works.
FREIGHT	.
650 General service cars, from Eastern Car Company.
500 Box cars, from Eastern Car Company.
1,500 Box cars, from National Steel Car Co.
1,000 Box cars, from Canadian Car Company.
500 Refrigerator cars, from Canadian Car Co.
350 Ballast cars, from Hart-Otis Car Co.
150 Stock cars, from Canadian Car & Foundry Co.
80 Cabooses, from Canadian Car & Foundry Co.
20 Cabooses, from Prestoii Car & Coach Co.
6 Snow plows, from Eastern Car Company.

[Stage Direction]
18 Sleepers, from Canadian Car & Foundry Co.
12 Diners, from Canadian Car & Foundry Co.
20 Baggage cars, from Canadian Car & Foundry Co.
20 Express Refrigerator, from National Steel Car Co.
4,901 Total.
All of this has been delivered with the exception of the passenger train equipment. The sleepers are now arriving, and will be completed by the end of March. Baggage car deliveries coil imenced March 9, and completion is prom ised by the end of April. Dining car deliveries are promised commencing April 8, and completion of the express refrigerators has definitely been promised during the month of May.
With reference to the purchase of locomotives, cars and rolling stock in general, prices have been increased very much. I submit the following statement for the information of the House showing some of the increases, caused by increased cost and heavier power and steel construction:
	1914-15	1920
Locomotives	$24,000	$61,250 to $72,500Standard sleepers. . .	28,250	49,500Dining cars	25,050	46,000Baggage cars	(wooden)	6,166	(Steel) 24,000Freight refrigerators.	1,640	5,025Express refrigerators.	4,642	12,240General service	freight cars	1,346	3,250Box cars	1,150	2,960Stock cars	846	2,640These figures will show	what the railways are up against.
Freight tonnage increased sixteen per cent over 1919 and passenger traffic by about a million, but while the quantity of freight and number of passengers increased, the haul in each case was shorter and returns not as great as expected.
Rate increases have been given from time to time in an effort to meet increased cost of operation under the McAdoo and United States Labour Board awards, under which the average wage per employee of the Canadian National system is now $1,850 as compared with $700 before the war. The result is the operating pay roll last year was $83,505,072 as compared with $40,606,170 in 1917. In addition wages on capital work required $12,222,045, making a total pay roll of $95,727,117. These figures justify immediate discussion between employees and management.
Of course, the railway situation in Canada, as elsewhere, is a product of the war. Every country in the world had to stand behind its railways during the war. We had no alternative but to follow suit and I am satisfied that, without the powerful support of the Government in the crisis which the war developed the railway situation would have been such that we would not have been able to carry on necessary war transportation facilities, and a collapse of our whole transportation system would have followed.
Let me refer briefly to the general railway situation throughout the United States. The total operating revenues for 1920, as reported by the Interstate Commerce Commission were $6,225,000,000, the largest in the history of American railroads, and $1,041,000,000 greater than for 1919. Operating expenses, however, consumed $5,826,197,000 of this, or $1,406,000,000 more than in 1919. The net operating income was only $62,264,421, as compared with an average of over $900,000,000 for the three years preceding the war. It is less than the roads should earn in one month to receive the six per cent which the United States Transportation Act prescribes as the measure of fair return on the investment; it is less than one-fourth of the various taxes payable by the roads, and represents a profit of almost exactly one per cent on the gross business done during the year, when the railroads handled more freight and passengers than ever before in their history. The sixty-two millions of net operating income was earned by about half of the Class 1 roads, the other half having deficits for the year. The United States Government has had to come to the rescue by a guarantee of about $600,000,000 for the six months' period following de-control. Of this sum about $200,000,000 has, it is
[Stage Direction]
stated, already been paid out for back wages under the Railroad Labour Board award. Only a special Act of Congress authorizing partial payments pending final settlement of the guarantee made it possible for many of these roads to avoid bankruptcy.
In England, passenger fares are seventy-five per cent above pre-war figures, and freight rates, from September 1st last, 112 per cent. Costs of materials have increased 200 per cent, and wages have increased 250 per cent. Further rate increases are contemplated, though short-distance freight has already commenced to move over the highways. In twenty months, the Government has had to provide about $350,000,000 under the Government guarantee, and claims are being made by the railways totalling $750,000,000 for arrears of maintenance, abnormal wear and tear, and replacement of stores. The British Government, therefore, faces a threatened loss of a billion dollars.
I hope I have made it clear that the result of the operation of Canadian National railways was not worse than obtained generally on the other side of the line and overseas. But that does not mean we should not take action to try and prevent these losses. At the present time the country is faced with permanent fixed charges as follows:
Interest public debt (including sinking fund)	$142,800,000
Pensions	 31,816,000
Permanent expenditure for carrying on the affairs of the Gov-eminent about	 127,000,000
Total, about	$301,616,000
This without one dollar for carrying on public works, expenditures in connection with soldier settlement and re-establishment, and many other expenditures that must be provided for.
This means very heavy taxation for many years, and it would be a very serious matter to have increased taxation for railways to the extent of fifty, sixty or seventy million of dollars per annum to meet the cost of operation of railwa'ys.
As regard these heavy losses I must frankly admit I cannot see much hope of any management materially reducing the loss on Grand Trunk Pacific and Transcontinental railways for some years, but I do feel the losses on the other portions of the road can be reduced, and must be very materially, every year.

, Grand Trunk Railway
The members should have a full statement with reference to the operations of the Grand Trunk railway, and when I say Grand Trunk railway I refer to the Grand Trunk Railway system now being taken over by the Government, the valuation of which is at present being decided by the board of arbitration.
I have not been able to get the annual closing statement from the Grand Trunk management up to the present time. Their staff is busy in connection with the arbitration proceedings. I had to send one of our expert auditors to secure from their books, and submit, a statement as to results of operations for the years 1919 and 1920, and he gives me the following report as approximately correct. After providing for operating expenses, tax accruals, income deductions, etc., the amount available for interest and dividends was, for 1919, $11,164,035.53; for 1920, $5,692,300.74. These amounts were available to meet interest and fixed charges on the following: 4 per cent and 5 per cent debenture stocks of the Grand Trunk, interest on all* mortgage bonds of the Grand Trunk, interest on all mortgage bonds of the Grand Trunk Western, interest on all mortgage bonds of the Central Vermont, interest on secured notes of the Grand Trunk Railway, interest or. equipment notes of the three companies, interest on guaranteed stock, first preference stock, second preference stock, third preference stock.
Out of the above amounts, the railway was able to meet in 1919 the interest on their fixed charges, but not on the share capital which includes the 4 per cent guaranteed stock, first, second and third preference stock, and ordinary stock. In 1920 the company falls short $6,563,091.33 of meeting interest on fixed charges. In justice, however, to the Grand Trunk management I should add that they had to pay $3,635,000 to the employees for back pay between May 1st and September 1st, when no increases for freight rates had been allowed.
In making this statement, however, it must be remembered that I am not taking into account the loss of $19,817,873 on the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, a subsidiary of the Grand Trunk railway, which the Grand Trunk Railway Company are responsible for, an amount sufficient to wipe out at any time all of the excess earnings as shown in the above statement. Later on in the session I hope to have from the

management, further information in order to give more details.
What is the best way to improve the situation? I am ready to take, in fact I seek, advice from any or every member of this House, or whoever may be able to make any suggestion of value. Our present system of administration by a board entirely free from interference by any minister, by any department, or by the Government, is one which public opinion has demanded, and which, if we can carry it on and make the railways a success, is no doubt better for all concerned. The press and public opinion are very critical over our railway problem, and rightly so. Notwithstanding the dark side I have shown, I am still a firm believer in the ultimate success of our National Railways. But as in all other large institutions, success depends on how they are managed. This question is too big to be a political football. Might I ask the House to discuss it in its larger aspect rather than in some minor detail? Let us have instead a frank discussion of the whole railway policy.
The solution of the problem is one which will require joint action by the management and employees. Not only as employees, as operators of the road, but as citizens of Canada, their interests are identical, and I feel sure that if they, the management and employees, meet and take up the whole railway problem, they can deal with it in such a way as to preserve the good relations which have so far existed between them. Unless some action is taken, not only to reduce the annual loss occurring each year, but also to place the railways in a position to reduce the freight rates, I am satisfied the future advancement of the country will be seriously interfered with. Our railways were built to develop our natural resources, to build up our country, and to connect the East with the West in interprovincial trade. Good work has been done and it must not stop. Let me give you one or two illustrations of what high freight rates are doing. We in the province of Ontario have for many years required, in fact used, lumber and timber grown and manufactured in the province of British Columbia. To-day this trade is absolutely cut off owing to high freight rates, thus injuring British Columbia, and Ontario and our country as a whole. British Columbia requires the markets of the western provinces and even the eastern provinces for their products. It is impossible for British Columbia to
grow and ship fruit and lumber at the present high rates of freight. The Prairie Provinces must live from the products of the soil. They cannot produce wheat and other products of their farms and ship it to foreign markets if these high freight rates are to continue indefinitely, and vice versa, things that are manufactured in the East that the people of the prairie and British Columbia require, cannot be produced and shipped to the western provinces if these high rates of freight are to continue. And if we are hindered in the production and manufacture of our natural products which improve our financial condition and add to the wealth of our country, does it not mean that the development of our country will be delayed until we are in a position to produce and manufacture on a basis equal to that of other countries? Surely this is a fair statement of the situation.
I must now conclude, but cannot do so without repeating my own honest opinion that our railways are a great asset for the future of Canada. If well and properly managed, and the press and public will only boost and not knock, it will be possible in a few years to show to the world just what a magnificent country we have in Canada.
Now, Mr. Speaker, with the permission of the House I would like to place on Hansard certain statistical and detailed information concerning last year's operations which has been suplied me by the management and which will be found of great value by hon. members.
These statements include comparative summaries of operating results and traffic statistics; a statement with regard to betterments and new construction during 1920, a comparative statement of equipment and some useful detailed information as to increased costs of rolling stock, material and supplies.
Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The House, is of
course, aware that only under exceptional circumstances are documents permitted to be inserted in Hansard when they have not been read. But, as the documents in question are of undoubted importance, I should like to know the pleasure of the House, whether it gives unanimous consent to their being incorporated in Hansard unread.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
(The documents referred to are as follows) :


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM CANADIAN GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS
[Stage Direction]
Comparative Summary of Operating Results 12 Months Ending December 31, 1920-1919.
-	1920.	1919	Increase or Decrease	% Increase or Decrease$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	Operating Revenue-	Canadian Northern	66,695,398 80	53,562,177 57	13,133,221 23	24-52Canadian Government	44,537,803 85	40,179,380 93	4,358,422 92	10-84Canadian National	111,233,202 65	93,741,55$ 50	17,491,644 15	18-66Distribution-	Passenger	21,092,253 10	21,837,744 47	-745,491 37	- 3-41Freight	80,193,342 44	63,154,773 39	17,038,569 05	26-98Other	9,947,607 11	8,749,040 64	1,198,566 47	13-70Operating Expenses-	Canadian Northern	82,953,978 60	60,034,023 92	22,919,954 68	38-18Canadian Government	54,987,680 28	47,728,205 73	7,259,474 55	11-86Canadian National	137,941,658 88	107,762,229 65	30,179,429 23	28-00Distribution-	Maintenance of way and Structure	34,759,329 17	28,476,450 66	6,282,878 51	22-06Maintenance of Equipment	27,963,511 21	19,950,409 17	8,013,102 04	40-15Traffic	2,140,576 09	1,478,372 41	662,203 68	44-79Trans.-Rail	68,146,727 31	52,914,891 80	15,231,835 51	28-78Trans.-Water	348,553 63	782,316 69	-433,763 06	-55-45Miscellaneous	2,320,234 54	1,877,168 08	443,066 46	23-60General	2,965,769 87	2,282,620 84	683,149 03	29-93Trans, of Capital account material	703,042 94	703,042 94	Operating Ratios-	Canadian Northern	124 38	112 08	12 30	10-97Canadian Government	123 46	118 79	4 67	3-93Canadian National	124 01	114 96	9 05	7-87Operating Deficit-	Canadian Northern	16,258,579 80	6,471,846 35	9,786,733 45	151-22Canadian Government	10,449,876 43	7,548,824 SO	2,901,051 63	38-43Canadian National	26,708,456 23	14,020,671 15	12,687,785 08	90-49Average Mileage operated-	Steam	13,854-9	13,502-5	352-4	2-61126-2	126-2	Total	13,981-1	13,628-7	352-4	2-58Revenue Train Miles	33,127,889	29,633,398	3,494,491	11-79Earnings per R.T.M	3-30	3-09	0-21	6-79Expenses per R.T.M	4-11	3-57	0-54	15-13Net Earnings per R.T.M	-0-81	-0-48	-0-33	-68-75(Water lines excluded).

[Stage Direction]
-	1920	1921	Increase or Decrease	Increase or Decrease$ cts.	$ cts.	S cts.	3 cts.Operating deficit	26,708,456 23	14,020,671 15	12,687,785 08	90-49Canadian Government Rentals	567,240 00	697,344 22	-130,104 22	-18-66Miscellaneous Income (Credit)	1,585,061 68	1,255,143 15	329,918 53	26-28Deficit St. John and Quebec	
Net deficit, excluding Canadian Northern fixed charges and miscellaneous income	346,015 49	187,269 97	158,745 50	84-77balance	26,035,659 04	13,650,142 19	12,386,507 85	90-74

[Stage Direction]
Comparison of Payroll, Twelve Months Ended December 31, 1920, Including Betterments
-	1920	1919	Increase	%$ cts. 37,103,129 97 54,973,613 24 92,076,743 21	$ cts. 31,855,264 61 43,366,183 65 75,221,448 26	$ cts. 5,247,865 36 11,607,429 59 16,855,294 95	16-47 26-76 22-40
Explanation of Increase
-	Canadian Government	Canadian Northern	Total	%Due to adoption of U. S. Labour Board Award No. 2	$ cts. 5,013,700 00	$ cts. 7,759,500 00	$ cts. 12,773,200 00	16-98Betterments, Deferred Maintenance and Increased Service	50,537 33	3,549,292 35	3,599,829 68	4-79Wages paid in 1920, properly chargeable, to 1919	183,628 03	298,637 24	482,265 27	0-64Total	5,247,868 36	11,607,429 59	16,855,294 95	22-41
Average Number Employees
-	1920	1919	Increase or decrease23,849 33,654 57,503	24,057 30,212 54,269	-208 3,442 3,234

[Stage Direction]
1920	1919	Increase or Decrease	Per Cent.
1. Passengers Carried (exclusive of Electric Lines)-				6-53
Canadian Government	7,266,749	6,821,515	445,234	Canadian Northern	5,648,352	4,925,547	542,805	11'02Canadian National	12,735,101	11,747,062	988,039	8-412. Number of Passengers Carried One Mile-	-24-82Canadian Government	370,030,589	492,197,448	-122,166,859	Canadian Northern	387,818,185	344,773,029	43,045,156	12-48Canadian National	757,848,774	836,970,477	-79,121,703	-9-453. Tons of Freight Handled-	1,660,530	14-83Canadian Government	12,859,955	11,199,425	Canadian Northern	14,504,411	12,439,314	2,065,097	16-60Canadian National	27,504,796	23,638,739	3,866,057	16-354. Tons of Freight Moved One Mile-	10-47Canadian Government	3,319,371,190	3,004,692,955	314,678,235	Canadian Northern	4,729,604,499	3,979,456,934	750,147,565	18-85Canadian National	8,048,975,689	6,984,149,889	1,064,825,800	15-25Per Passenger	Per Ton Freight	1920	1919	1920	19195. Average Haul-	50-92 70-92 59-51	72-15 70-	00 71-	24	258-12 326-08 292-64	268-29 319-91 295-45
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS Train Mileage
-	1920	1919	Increase or decrease	Per cent
Passenger-				0-99
Canadian Government	4,791,387	4,744,179	47,208	Canadian Northern	6,992,016	5,847,229	1,144,787	19-58Canadian National	11,783,403	10,591,408	1,191,995	11-25Mixed-	Canadian Government	1,236,931	1,174,923	62,008	5-28Canadian Northern	1,824,059	1,826,898	-2,839	-[DOT]16Canadian National	3,060,990	3,001,821	59,169	1-97Freight-	6-63Canadian Government	6,611,115	6,199,775	411,340	Canadian Northern	11,559,893	9,788,196	1,771,697	18-10Canadian National	18,171,008	15,987,971	2,183,037	13-65Special-	302-05Canadian Government	28,618	7,118	21,500	Canadian Northern	82,132	51,127	31,005	60-64Canadian National	110,750	58,245	52,505	90-14Work-	Canadian Government	622,360	547,594	74,766	13-65Canadian Northern	1,712,118	1,503,398	208,720	13-88Canadian National	2,334,478	2,050,992	283,486	13-82Total-	4-87Canadian Government	13,290,411	12,673,589	616,822	Canadian Northern	22,170,218	19,016,848	3,153,370	16-58Canadian National	35,460,629	31,690,437	3,770,192	11-90
[Stage Direction]
Copy.	CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS.
Memorandum re Operating Deficits for year 1920.
Canadian Northern Railway	
Canadian Government Railways	
Divided as follows :-
Intercolonial Railway	$6,549,629	48Prince Edward Island Railway	
729,772	16Transcontinental	
2,780,359	46Moncton and Buctouche Railway	
43,800	68Elgin and Havelock Railway	
47,518	25St. Martins Railway	
60,305	39York and Carleton Railway	
21,317	39Salisbury and Albert	
88,033	60LothbiniOre and Mfegantic	
20,413	49Caraquet and Gulf Shore Railway	
29,329	87Cape Breton Railway	
14,621	65Quebec and Saguenay Railway	
13,189	84Hudson Bay Railway	
61,585	17
[Stage Direction]
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	$10,134,513 94
Total Operating Deficit	$36,842,970 17

[Stage Direction]
Statement showing Details of Equipment on Hand December 31, 1919-Deliveries, Retirements
and Positions at December 31, 1920
-	Dec. 31 1919	Retire- ments During Year	Delivered During Year	Dec. 31 1920Locomotives-	1,439	25	55	1,469
193	7	20	206
	13			13
				
	1,645	32	75	1,688
				
Passenger Equipment-	379	6	21	394214	8	10	216131	1	33	163308	26	2	28448	7	9	5044	2	15	57146	5	31	17225	1	20	44386	12	15	38955	1	5484	23	61
1,820	92	156	1,884
				
Freight Equipment-	42,257 7,920	608	2,285	43,934 7,647 3,180 6,908 78
		273		
	3i 205 6,184 79	25		
		276	1,000	
		1		
	1,229 961	2	525	1,752 1,147
		40	226	
				
	61,835	1,225	4,036	64,646
				
Work Equipment-	91	2	14	103151	11	15	155789	15	129	9033,120	76	72	3,1164,151	104	230	4,2771,645 67,806	32	75	1,688 70,8071,421	4,422

[Stage Direction]
Comparative Summary of Operating Results for Year ending December 31, 1920
-	1920	1919	Increase or Decrease	Increase$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	%Operating Revenue	14,408,549 66	11,294,617 87	3,113,931 79	27-57Distribution-	Passenger	2,491,318 48	2,161,565 20	329,753 28	15-25Freight	10,757,773 29	8,073,267 64	2,684,505 65	33-25Other	1,159,457 89	1,059,785 03	99,672 86	9-40Operating Expenses	24,543,063 60	17,587,567 37	6,955,496 23	39-55Distribution-	Maintenance of Way and Structures....	8,147,888 61	5,057,098 29	3,090,790 32	61-12Maintenance of Equipment	6,871,192 13	5,251,895 16	1,619,296 97	30-83Traffic	316,139 00	293,904 11	22,234 89	7-57Transportation-Rail	8,548,878 70	6,265,460 67	2,283,418 63	36-44Transportation-W ater	1,582 16	1,582 16	Miscellaneous	244,428 53	218,048 34	26,380 19	12-10General	412,954 *47	501,161 40	-88,206 93	-17-60Operating Ratio	170 33	155 72	14 61	9-38Operating Deficit	10,134,513 94	6,292,949 50	3,841,564 44	61-04Mileage operated	2,840-53	2,840-53	Revenue Train Miles	4,792-470	4j 017-923	774,547	19-28Earnings per R.T.M	3-01	2-81	0-20	7-11Expenses per R.T.M	5-12	4-38	0-74	16-89Net Earnings per R.T.M	-2-11	-1-57	-0-54	-34-39
Train Mileage
-	1920	1919	Increase	Per cent1,539,184 2,817,337 435,949	1,291,480 2,265,085 461,358	247,704 552,252 -25,409	19-17 24-38 -5-51Freight Trains	Mixed Trains	
4,792,470	4,017,923	774,547	19-27
				
[Mr. J. D.
Reid.]

[Stage Direction]
Statement Showing Details of Equipment on Hand December 31, 1919, Deliveries, Retirements and Position at December 31, 1920.
-	Dec. 31, 1919	Retirements during Year	Delivered during Year	Dec. 31, 1920
Locomotives-				
	111			111
Freight	154	3	15	16618	10	28
Total		283	3	25	305
Passenger Equipment-				
	63			63
23	6	2921	6	1551	5122	2213	1330	3022	2237	3711	1	1062	62Total	355	7	6	354Freight Equipment-	11,676	686	11,5901,992	22	1,970289	4	£££500	500
Refrigerator cars		242	1	11	252
				
Total		14,199	113	511	14,597
Work Equipment-				
	1,032	2		1,030
	' 8			8
Caboose cars	138	8	30	160393	9	384Total	1,571	19	30	1,582Total locomotives	283	3	25	305Total cars	16,125	139	547	16,533
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY Annual Report with regard to betterments for the fiscal year ending December 31st, 1920. The total main track mileage operated by the Canadian National Railway System on
January 1st, 1920, was 13,945.97 miles.
On December 31st, 1920, the operated mileage was as follows:
Hudson Bay Railway	 243.00
Intercolonial Railway, including International & N.B., and P.E.I. Railway ..	1,670.58
Prince Edward Railway	 275.99*
Branch lines in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Quebec	r .. ..	275.22
Quebec and Saguenay Railway	 92.71
St. John & Quebec Railway (leased)	\	 172.07
Transcontinental Railway, Eastern and Western lines, including the Lake
Superior branch	 2,006.58
Canadian Northern Railway System	 9,868.9*0
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	 2,732.42
Total mileage Canadian National Railways all operated lines	 17,337.42
During the year the following mileage was added by purchase:
Lotbiniere & Megantic Railway, purchased by the Dominion Government, and
put into operation April 1st, 1920	 29.59
Caraquet & Gulf Shore Railway, purchased by the Dominion Government, and
put into operation June 1st, 1920	 80.01
Cape Breton Railway, purchased by the Dominion Government, and put into
operation July 1st, 1920	 30.64
Total mileage added by purchase	 140.24
[Stage Direction]
Lines on which construction was completed and taken over for operation:
Canadian Government Railways-
Quebec & Saguenay Railway, put into operation October 1st, 1920	 62.00
Canadian Northern Railways, Eastern lines-
Washago cut-off, put into operation June, 1920	 1.10
St. Marc cut-off, put into operation September 23rd, 1920	 2.36
Cartierville spur, put into operation October 25th, 1920	 0.84
Canadian Northern Railways, Western lines-
Speddon to St. Paul Junction, put into operation January, 1920	 98.50
Dunblane to Lucky Lake, put into operation October 3rd, 1920	 19.75
Eaton to Alsask, put into operation December 20th, 1920	 33.13
Speddon to St. Paul de Metis, put into operation December 20th, 1920..	22.80
240.43
Reduction in mileage due to connection between the Grenville and Lachute
subdivisions	 4.40
Net increase in mileage due to construction	 236.08
On August 23rd, 1920, the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, which was operated under the receivership of the Minister of Railways and Canals, was taken over, with a mileage of 2,732.4 miles.
Total mileage added during the year, 3,108.72 miles.
Betterments made to roadbed and track during the year, as follows:
New 85-lb. rail laid, 1920-
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern lines	 158 miles
"	"	" Western lines	
12	"Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines	
161	""	"	" Eastern lines	
72	"403	"
Ties put in track-
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern lines	 1,245,472
"	"	" Western lines	 204,773
Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines	 2,441,177
"	"	"	Eastern lines	 1,457,768
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	 1,422,479
6,771,669
Ballasting, 1920-Chargeable to Capital Account-
Canadian Government Railway	 30 miles
Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines	
230	"'[DOT]	"	"	Eastern lines	
306	"566	"
Tie plates, 1920-
Canadian Government Railway, Eastern lines	 560,400
"	"	" Western lines	 54,400
Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines	 232,000
"	"	"	Eastern lines	 433,600
Halifax & South Western Railway	 Nil
_	1,280,400
Rail anchors, 1920-
Canadian Government Railway, Eastern lines "	"	" Western lines
Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines..
"	"	" Eastern lines..
Hudson Bay Railway	
50,800
5,000
25.000
14.000 6,800
Nil
Fencing-wire and snow-
Canadian Government Railways		77 miles
Canadian Northern Railway, Western lines	
94	""	"	" Eastern lines	
50	"
[Stage Direction]
New Structures and Improvements to Existing Facilities as follows:-
-	Canadian Government Railways	Canadian Northern Railway	TotalsEastern Lines	Western Lines	Eastern Lines	Western Lines	Station -New	6	2	22	17	476	3	14	233	3	4 \	107	1	7	15Bunk House-Section dwellings	38	5	37	69	~ 149Other Buildings-New	13	2	11	111	1372	1	14	17Coaling Plants	8	1	7	16Water supplies	14	9	8	31Sidings	102	8	57	86	253New Culverts	137	30	12	179New Bridges	10	1	29	18	58Bridges and Trestles filled	2	16	54	23	95
In addition to the above there were numerous other works undertaken and completed such as the construction otf platforms, ashpits, drop-pits, road and farm crossings, ditching, wells for station water supplies, roadways, etc., and the providing and installation of turntables, track scales, machinery in shops and roundhouses, heating and lighting of stations, platforms and other buildings, interlocking plants, etc.
The following are some of the larger items carried out during the year:-
Canadian Government Railways
At Halifax Ocean Terminals, the train shed and platforms were completed. Grading of engine terminal site at Fail-view was 80 per cent completed.
Paving of city streets in the vicinity of stations, freight Sheds and terminals was done at four locations.
Work of re-arranging the yards at Mulgrave, Stellartoni Sydney, Royalty Junction, Drummondville, McGivney and Amos, as well as several smaller yards, was carried' out the majority of this work being completed.
Double tracking between Truro and Belmont, Sprinighill and Maecan, Ohaudiere Junction, and St. Nicholas, Bagot and St. Rosalie Junction was completed and put into operation The cut-off from the St. John subdivision to the N.T.R. at the west end of Moncton yard was completed, with the exception of a small amount of ballasting.
Grading for engine terminal site at Moncton was completed and is now ready for the erection of new terminal buildings and yard tracks. The provision of this new yard and terminal along with the new connection at the west end of yard will permit of all traffic being handled m one yard and greatly facilitate the handling of trains and engines and make large reduction in the cost of conducting traffic.
At Island yard, St. John, nine new yard tracks having a capacity of 590 cars for the handling of export traffic wore completed and put into operation.
The replacement of the substructure for a double track bridge over the Tantramar river near Sackville was 42 per cent completed during the year.
At Cape Tormentine it was found necessary to dredge the entrance channel and turning basin to provide greater depth of water, there (being danger of the ferry steamer Prince Edward Island touching bottom during low tides and gales This work was 30 per cent completed.
Between McGivney Junction and Fredericton on the Fredericton subdivision grade and alignment revisions were undertaken at Durban and Taymouth. 55 per cent of this work was completed.
At Ohaudiere Junction a commencement was made on the work of Improving engine facilities which were inadequate and Inefficient. The increased' terminal facilities at this point will, when completed, permit of the abandonment of the G.T.R. engine facilities at Point Levis and the N.T.R. engine facilities at Bridge on the north side of the St Lawrence river the business of the three terminals being handled at Ohaudiere. A connection between Charnv and Quebec bridge to facilitate the operation of the railway was 25 per cent completed ' At St. Malo shops additional equipment, tools and machinery were installed and'addi' tional tracks provided.
Canadian Northern Railway (Western Lines)
New elevator at Port Arthur was put in operation
Yard re-arrangement at Atikokan

Additional tracks were put in and existing tracks re-arranged to provide suitable yard accommodation to take care of business
Fort Francis-At this point roundhouse, boiler shed and turntable were installed Additional machinery was added to Port Rouge shops at Winnipeg to facilitate renairs to equipment, etc.	impairs
Work was commenced on shop, engine and yard facilities at Nutana Additional tracks, ash pits and general improvements made to yard at Humboldt At Eaton, on Elrose subdivision, new divisional point buildings are being erected and yard tracks, etc., bemg put in.	u
Prince Albert yard facilities were improved.
[Stage Direction]


Canadian Northern Railway (Eastern Lines)
Alterations and additions to tracks and freight office building were made at Cherry St. yards, Toronto, on account of oo-operation of C.N.R. and G.T. Railway. By doing this savings were effected.
A connection between C.N. Railway and G.T. Railway was made at Pembroke to allow C.N.R. train to use the G.T.R station. The C.N.R. yards at this point were enlarged to take care of combined business.
Temporary connection was installed between C.N.R. and G.T.R. at Napanee and Washago
Restaurant and Express facilities combined at North Bay. [DOT]
At Capreol on the C.N.R. a Y.M.C.A. building was finished.
Improving line and strengthening bridges on the St. Lawrence subdivision.
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway
Track diversions were made on the Lucerne and Fraser Subdivisions.
Improvements were made to car Ferry Slip at Prince Rupert.
Right of way fencing was done on Mountain Division on Cut Knife Branch.
Water supplies were improved at Colfax, Shontz, Prince George, Justice, Kinsella and Bruce.
Some of the station buildings constructed were located at Avonhurst, Lorlie, Gilroy, Domreny, Wakaw, Carruthers and Houston.	.
Culverts were installed and bridges filled at a number of locations.
General work of ballasting, ditching, riprapping and stuccoing stations was carried out.
During the present year it is proposed to continue works which were uncompleted at the end of last year and undertake new works of which the larger items are briefly referred to below
Canadian Government Railways
Continuation of the work of dredging at Cape Tormentine, double track bridge over the Tantramar river near Saekville, terminal facilities at Moncton, Island Yard, St. John, strengthening of Branch Lines in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Quebec, grade and alignment revisions on the Fredericton Subdivision, and engine facilities at Chaudiere Junction.
Large new works include the installation of automatic block signals between Maccan and Painsec Junction, Moncton and 'Pacific Junction, Charny and Bridge and the replacement of trestles on the Transcontinental Railway, Eastern and Western Lines.
In connection with the co-ordination of the C.G.R. and G.T.R. it is proposed to make extension of St. Jtosalie yard and provide a new water supply, the present supply being inadequate.
On the. Quebec & Saguenay railway during the past year construction work was done to complete the line for operation and line was put into operation on October 1st, 1920. This year it is proposed to provide riprap protection to embankments and make repairs to equipment.
On the Hudson Bay railway it is proposed to provide 170,000 ties and do a certain amount of ballasting and surfacing.
Canadian Northern Railway (Western Lines)
New bridges are proposed for crossing over Otter Tail river and on North Lake Subdivision also across South Saskatchewan river near Saskatoon.
At Winnipeg Terminals additional tracks are required and it is proposed to construct new yard at Nutana and make alteration to yard at Edmonton and commence new yard at Wayne.
New water supplies are required at Dana, Lloydminster and Kindersley to facilitate operation of trains.
It is considered necessary to relay a portion of the line on Hanna SD. with 85 lb. steel on account of heavy coal traffic originating at Drumheller Mines, also about 25 miles of the Main Line on the Kamsack Subdivision.
It is proposed to complete third car barge for service between Vancouver Island and Mainland.
Canadian Northern Railway (Eastern Lines)
Improving of Terminal facilities at Joliette, Limoilou.
New bridges to be put in on Jonquiere, Roberval, St. Lawrence, Muskoka, North Bay, Pembroke, Oba and Long Lake Subdivisions, and strengthening other bridges to carry heavy power.
Interlocking Plant to be put in at Harrowsmith, to further facilitate the safe operation of trains.
Light steel bridges to be replaced and trestles to be filled and replaced on Chester, Liverpool and Port Wade Subdivisions of Halifax & South Western railway.
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway
Track diversion at Firdale.	,
Station and restaurant building at Prince George; and station, baggage room, etc., at Prince Rupert.
Improve roundhouse facilities at Melville and Edson.
Water supplies at Melville, Hubbard, Archydal and on Riverhurst, Boundary and Cud-worth Subdivisions.
Building large culverts preparatory to filling lumber trestles on Brul6 and Evansburg Subdivisions.
Car Shops at Edmonton.
. Salmon Wharf at Prince Rupert.
[Mr. J. D. Reid.l

Co-ordination C.N.Rlys. and Grand Trunk Rly. and C.N. Rly. and G. T. Pacific Railway.
Joint committees were appointed for the purpose of organizing efficiency and the reduction of expenses by joint operation and joint facilities when possible. During the present year to consolidate facilities with the Grand Trunk Railway it is proposed to construct connections at Washago, Otter Lake and Napanee; construct additional trackage at North Bay and Napanee and provide various facilities at Hawkesbury and Rockland. To consolidate with the Grand Trunk Pacific railway it is proposed to construct new connections at Stony Plains, Alix and Calgary; provide additional trackage and consolidate existing trackage at Portage La Prairie, Stony Plains, Edson, Jasper and Riley; make track alterations to permit of the elimination of interlocking plantis at Portage La Prairie, Yorkton, MTle 600', Evansburg Subdivision, Lamp-man and Regina.
CANADIAN NATIONAL TELEGRAPHS Statement of Pole and Wire Mileages
	January 1, 1921		January 1, 1920	
Poles	Wires	Poles	WiresC.N.R. System (including Transcontinental and	10,424 8,181 2,820	44,553 29,401 14,430	10,294 8,264 2,822	35,967 29,465 14,252
21,425	88,384	21,380	79,684
				
Principal Additional Wires Erected in 1920
Number	Kind of wire	Between	M ileage2	Copper	7461 '	1771	Quebec and Chic utimi	227a [DOT]	3,9271	(c	1,4571	«	3731	it	Toronto and Parry Sound	1491	Iron	7761	260Total	8,092

[Stage Direction]
Statement of work done on construction of new lines during the year 1920.
Eastern Lines-
There was no work done on Eastern Lines in the way of constructing new branches, all this work during the year being confined to Western Lines.
Western Lines-
Grading-
During the year there was the equivalent of 141.5 miles of grading completed. By "equivalent" is meant that in certain places each mile may not have been completely finished so the percentage of this in yards to the whole yardage was taken to get the number of miles done.
Of this 141.5 miles of grading 88.8 miles were done oh prairie lines and 52.7 in British Columbia on the Okanagan branch.
An appended statement gives in detail the branches on which this grading was accomplished, and is divided by provinces; this shows there was completed in Manitoba 14.4 miles, in Saskatchewan 52.6 miles, in Alberta 22.1 miles and in British Columbia 52.7 miles. Bridges and Trestles-
On new lines in 1920, in the erection of 40 bridges and trestles 2,781,893 F.B.M. of timber, 79,682 lin. ft. of piling, and 139,910 lbs. of iron were used. There was also placed one 147-foot wooden deck Howe truss. Detail of where this work was done is given on an attached statement.
Tracklaying-
There was laid in 1920, 147.6 miles of track on new lines; 128.1 miles being laid on prairie lines and 19.5 miles in British Columbia on the Vancouver Island line. A detailed statement attached shows the branches on which this track was laid, and divided into
1020
[Stage Direction]
provinces shows there was laid in Manitoba 0.0 miles, in Saskatchewan 73.9 miles, in Alberta 54.2 miles, and in British Columbia 19.5 miles.
In connection with tracklayjng; 86 switches and frogs were placed for sidings and wyes on new lines, 20 sidings having been installed as well as 4 wyes. This used up 8.9 miles of track in addition to the main line track referred to above.
Ballasting and Surfacing-
In 1192*0 there were 182.5 miles of new track ballasted; 163 miles of this was on prairie lines, made up of 40 miles on the Alsask branch, 120 miles on the Oliver branch and 3 miles on the double track, Munson-Wayne, near Drumheller. The balance of 19.5 miles was done on the Vancouver Island line.
Buildings and Structures-'Water Tanks-
Seven water tanks were completed in the season for new lines, and four pump houses and 6,400 lin. ft. of pipe line built to serve them.
Stations-
During the year four 3rd class; five 4th* class stations, 17 freight and passenger shelters, 19 loading platforms and 15 stock yards were erected on new lines.
Section Houses-
Sixteen section houses were completed on new lines during 1920. The branches on which these buildings were placed is shown in the attached table.
Miles put in operation-
During 1920 on Canadian Northern Western Lines there were 85.23 miles of new lines turned over to the operating department for permanent operation, and in addition to this 120.8 miles of new lines were turned over to the operating department for operation on behalf of construction department, or a total of 206.03 miles. Attached is detailed statement showing these lines and mileages.	%
\
\
[Stage Direction]
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS Statement of Grading and Trackl vying Done, During 1920 on New Lines
No. on Map, 1921	
\	Grading	Track- laying1	Manitoba-	4-5	2	9-63	
14-1	
			
12	Saskatchewan-		197
16		2-6	
13	Eston, S.E...	5-2	7	3-9	31-871	6-1	6	Melfort, N.E	11-7	3	1-8	10	4-1	7-144	5-8	7-2515	5-9	8-008	3-9	14	1-6	
52-6	73-9
			
16	Alberta-	6-9	18	5-1	8-020	0-4	20-922	2-9	19-221	3-8	6-125	3-0	
22-1	54-
			
	British Columbia-	52-7	
			19-5
			
		52-7	19-5
			
Summary	Grade	Track
Summary-	14-1	
	52-6	73-9
	22-1	54-2
		
	' 88-8	128-1
		
	52-7	19-5
		
	141-5	147-6
		
,

[Stage Direction]
Statement of Work other than Grading and Tracklaying Done by Construction Department in 1920 on New Western Lines
-	Track Surfaced	Turn- outs Placed	Tanks	Pump Houses	Pipe Lines	Third Class Status	Fourth, Class Status	F. & P. Shelter	Section Houses	Load- ing Plat- form	Stock Yards	No. of Trestle	Trestles	Piles Driven	IronMiles	Lin. Ft.	M.F.B.M.	Li t.	Lbs.Alsask, S.E	40	4	2	1	1	2	1	3	3	5	10	1	1	1	1	5	38,000	2,280	2,280i	7	1	1,500	1	1	3	5	7	3	4	279,963	16,920	14,1862	3	63,600	2,525	3,2003	21	1	]	400	15	201,312	15,127	4,215120	12	1	1,000	1	1	8	6	7	5	1	295,780	11,330	10,4905	9	1,436,407	31,500	69,0195	5	1	7	1	1	2,500	1	1	1	1	Total Prairie Lines	163	78	6	3	5,400	4	5	13	16	19	15	37	2,315,062	79,682	103,39019-5	8	1	1	1,000	4	3	466,830	36,520
Total		182-5	86	7	4	6,400	4	5	17	16	19	15	40	2,781,892	79,682	139,910
1022	COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Statement of miles of new lines put into either permanent or temporary operation, 1920.
Lines turned over to Operating Department for permanent operation, 1920.
Saskatchewan-	Miles Miles
12. Alsask S.E. line from Eaton, Mile 115 to Alsask, Mile 148.13.. 33.15
12. Alsask S.E. from Glidden, Mile 1*05 to Eaton, Mile 115	 10.0
11. Luck Lake	v	 19.75	62.90
Alberta-
20. Oliver N.E. from Spedden, Mile 98.5 to St. Paul, Mile 120.85..	22.35	22.35
Total mileage new line® put in permanent operation	 85.25
Lines turned over to Operating Department for operation on behalf of Construction Department.
Saskatchewan-
4. Thunderhill extension from Preeceville, Mile 72.6 to Lintlaw,
Mile 100.3	 27.7
10. Gravelbourg extension from Gravelbourg, Mile 79 to Hodgeville,
Mile 104.6	 25.6
7. Melfort-Humboldt line from Humboldt to Lake Lenore	 15.0	68.3
British Columbia-
Vancouver Island line, Victoria to Mile 52.5	 52.5	52.5
Total mileage new lines put in temporary operation	 120.8
Total mileage new lines put in operation	 120.05
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM Cost of Equipment
-	1914	1915	1916	1917	1918	1919	19208 cts.	S cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts. 58,000 00	$ cts.	$ cts.57,000 00	61.250	00 64.250	00 72,500 00 39,225 00
6-Wheel Switching Locomo-					40,500 00	37,000 00 :3,COO 00	
	16,586 00	16,250 00					
Compartment Observation	46.000	00 46.000	00 44.000	00 39,500 00 29,750 00 4,000 00	28,250 00	35,890 00 34,100 00	49,500 00 46,000 0025,050 00	
11,500 00 1,640 00		11,500 00				
Freight Refrigerator Cars-				2,700 00	4,097 00 4,642 00		5,025 00 12,240 00 24,000 00
							
		*6,666 00	*8,000 00			23.500	00 32.500	00 3,179 00 3,075 00 2,888 64 2,507 00 2,285 00 2,215 00 8,484 52	
	16,575 00 1,346 00						
		1,346 00 1,261 50 1.485 00 1,150 00			3.179	00 3.179	50 2,376 00 2,750 00 2,271 00 2,370 00 8,000 00		3,250 00 3,425 00 3,033 10 2,960 00 2,640 00
							
				2,096 00			
	1,150 00 846 00						
			875 00				
		*850 00 5,000 00					
							9,141 50
							
*The baggage cars in 1915 and 1916 were wooden and in 1919 and 1920 they were steel. The flat cars in 1915 were wooden and in 1918-19 they were steel underframe.

[Stage Direction]
Material	1914	1920	Increase PercentageLess 25%	Plus 50 % 6-00 cwt. 3-50 cwt. f.o.b. Soo 3-50 cwt. f.o.b. Soo 6-75 cwt. 6-75 cwt.	100166 112
1 *65 cwt. f.o.b. Soo		112
			117
			117
			128
			69
	4-75 cwt.		173
			128
	1-66 f.o.b. Montreal 20 [DOT] 50 pair [DOT]14 gal.	3-60 (April f.o.b. Longue Pt.) 56-00 pair [DOT]27^ gal.	116
			173
Coai Oil..						96
			180
	[DOT] 15 gal. [DOT]85 piece 1-17 piece	[DOT]40 gal. 1-70 piece 2 [DOT] 95 piece	166
			100
			152
			128
Lumber and Timber-	22 00 M	47-50 M	115
	33-50 f.o.b. Sudbury 27-00 M		168
		70 00 M	159
			182
Paints-	[DOT]80 gal. [DOT]22 per lb.	2-00 gal. [DOT]45 per lb.	150
			104
			122
	[DOT]60 gal. List less 74§-7|-2| 32 00 G.T.	2*50 gal. Less 30% 60 00 G.T.	316
			204
			87
			251
			124
17 00	38-50	12616-00	36-50	128108257[DOT]07721 lb. [DOT]0970 lb.	[DOT]15f lb.	118[DOT]2685 lb.	176[DOT]1195 lb.	[DOT]331 ib.	1805313-50	23-25	7220 00	40-00	100[DOT]45	[DOT]81 f.o.b. part of shpt. 6-86	803-16 ton	111
Mr. P. F. CASGRAIN:: May I ask the
minister-


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Before the hon. member proceeds, I must direct the attention of the House to the fact that it is questionable whether the minister may be interrogated at this stage. If hon. members desired to question the minister, their scope of inquiry at present would be very limited, and I think it would be far better, as I have no doubt the House will agree, that questions be deferred until the House is in Committee of the Whole.


Jacques Bureau: I understand that we automatically go into Supply now, under the rules, and I would like to point out that there may be an opportunity for a genera? debate on the railway situation.
.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I should have left the
Chair without question put when the order for Supply was called in the first instance, but I then stated that I would ask the unanimous consent of the House for the minister to make a statement, following which I would leave the Chair, according to rule.

The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
Entomology-$ 2(6,000.


Charles Murphy: Will the Minister of
Agriculture explain the reason for the increase of $8,000 in this item?


Mr. TOLMIE:: This item for entomology covers the study of insects which has a relation to agriculture, many of these

insects doing damage to agricultural products, to the extent of something over $100,000,000 a year. The increase of $8,000 is made up, first, by a grant to the Imperial Bureau of Entomology amounting to $5,000. This Imperial Bureau has its headquarters in London, and consists of representatives of all the British dominions. It carries on investigation there, and gathers information regarding various insect parasites from all over the world. The Bureau is contributed to and maintained by the various Dominions that are interested in it. The Bureau also issues from time to time certain printed matter giving the latest information regarding the insects in question. This information is available to our Department at any time it is required, and where its value in particular comes in is, that in the event of any strange insect appearing among our crops in Canada from which we expect damage we can immediately find out the life history of that insect and all the particulars that are known concerning it, by applying to the Bureau in London. The other $3,000 is to cover extension work; certain extra assistance will he required in the fall this year in connection with the corn bore infection in the corn growing counties in southern Ontario; for extra printed matter and general expenses of the office.


William Stevens Fielding: The minister referred
to a Bureau in London. By whom is Canada represented at that Bureau?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We have no representative on the ground, but we contribute to the maintenance of the office and for that reason all the information gathered is available to us on application, in addition to the printed material that is issued regularly.


Mr. MORPHY:: Will the minister state
what other Dominions are contributing to the maintenance of this Bureau and the amount of such contributions?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I am sure that India,
South Africa, Australia and New Zealand are contributing, but I cannot at present give the hon. member the exact amount in each case.


William Stevens Fielding: I suppose the reports
issued by the Bureau in question will show the manner in which these sums of money are being expended, and by reference to the reports we could get the desired information?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes. I understand that
information is printed.


Jacques Bureau: Before this item carries I would like to have a point settled in connection with a ruling which was given by the Chair on Tuesday night. I do not dispute the ruling, and I am not going to argue the matter, but it was to the effect that when an item was carried in Committee of Supply any minister could call the estimates of his department, or could call the estimates of any department, practically at any time when the Committee of Supply was sitting, and the only way by which we could hold back the calling of the items of a special department which we had not agreed to discuss at the time, was not to let the particular estimate under consideration pass. Now, I do not desire to obstruct the passage of the estimates of the Minister of Agriculture; on the contrary my desire, if anything is that they should be put through with gll possible despatch. But I notice that last night when the hon. member for Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding) asked the Prime Minister what business would be taken up to-day he received the following reply:
To-morrow is Government day. The orders to be taken up will include the motion to go into Supply upon the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture and any others that we may be entitled to consider.
Now that is rather a vague statement. The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Doherty) will, I am sure, bear me out in the statement that in former years it has always been customary for the Government to make a definite statement each night when adjourning as to what work would be taken up next day. That has been the practice ever since Confederation. But now we seem to be drifting into rather a vague policy, and it is just as well to have the point settled now as to the right course to pursue, in order that there may be no misunderstanding in the future. For my part I am willing to further the dispatch of the business of the House, but it is desirable that in respect to the conduct of affairs there should be definiteness and not vagueness. If it is going to be a question of taking some small advantage out of this vagueness, I am prepared to discuss the matter to a conclusion. If we cannot have the required understanding then in my opinion hon. gentlemen on this side should continue speaking to this item until we are vouchsafed the information as to what is coming next. I think we are entitled to be treated with more deference than appears to have been the case, and I

think greater progress will be made if we are given that information which we consider we are entitled to. I should draw the inference from the ruling made by you, Mr. Chairman, the other night, that the ministers have the right to take up on Thursdays and Fridays only, those items which have previously been considered, but that on all other days-they could take up anything.


The CHAIRMAN:: If the Committee will allow me I shall draw the attention of the hon. member to the wording of the ruling which I gave on Tuesday evening. At page 1004 of Unrevised Hansard he will find that in answer to the question asked by the hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) as to whether all hon. ministers could call the items of their respective departments on the same *lay, I stated:
that if the committee would consent to dispose of those Estimates with sufficient speed to allow them to do so, the ministers would have that right except on Thursday or Friday when their estimates had not previously been taken up.
The only Estimates that have heretofore been taken up are the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture, and for that reason, without the unanimous consent of this committee no Estimates of any other department can be taken up to-day.


Jacques Bureau: And on Tuesday?


Georges Henri Boivin: On Tuesday any Estimates can be taken up.


George Green Foster: On motion.


Georges Henri Boivin: Yes, after a motion that Mr. Speaker leave the Chair for the House to go into Committee of Supply, has been agreed to.


William Stevens Fielding: This matter is rather one of courtesy than a rule of the House. I think the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) has correctly stated that it is for the convenience of the House as well as a courtesy to the Opposition that at the close of the business each night we shall have an announcement of what business is coming on next day; and if the order of business as announced be changed, it should be a matter of courtesy to so advise hon. gentlemen on both sides.


George Green Foster: I quite agree with my hon. friend.


Mr. ROBB:: Might I suggest to the right hon. gentleman leading the House that we might with considerable advantage follow the practice adopted in the British House

of Commons and on Thursday of each week have a statement from the ministry of what business will be taken up on each day of the following week.


George Green Foster: That would be sometimes difficult to do and would not always meet the convenience of the House. I think the rule as it has just been stated by the Chairman, coupled with the conversation we have had across the floor, will be sufficient.


Mri BUREAU:: While we are on the subject I am going to call the attention of the leader of the House to the fact that the statement made yesterday regarding the order of business for to-day is very indefinite. The Prime Minister then stated:
The order to be taken up will include the motion to go into Supply upon the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture and any others that we may be entitled to consider.
I want to know if we are going to be left in that uncertain position. We should know definitely what is coming forward and then we can see what we will do.


George Green Foster: The Chairman has just ruled what we are entitled to do, but at the same time it is quite reasonable that whoever makes the final announcement in the evening should make it as definite as it can possibly be made. I am sure there is no other intention.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough):: We on this side of the House do not admit that the spirit of the rule is observed. The rule might operate towards destroying the privilege which members have of discussing any department when it first comes before the House in the Estimates. In Bourinot I find on page 424 the following:
The object of the proviso is to permit of debate before first entering upon the Estimates of any department, but in practice, the consent of the Bouse is generally given to taking up a department's Estimates without preliminary debate, under a general understanding that such debate will be entered upon at some more convenient time. The British Parliament bias a somewhat similar rule.
As the ruling was made the other evening it would appear to me that the ordinary privilege members have of discussing a special department before we enter upon the Estimates of that department was taken away altogether. I think it would be well for the leader to let us know what the policy of the Government is in regard to this matter; otherwise, as my hon.

friend-from Three Rivers has said, we might be under the necessity of preventing the passing of an item for fear the Government would call an item in another department that had not yet been considered.


George Green Foster: I think my hon. friend need have no fear that he will be ill-treated.
Administration and enforcement of the Destructive Insect and Pest Act, $180,000.


Mr. McKENZIE :: What progress is being made in the work to which this vote applies? Last summer in the Maritime Provinces we were reading about the incursion of the army worm into the province of Ontario. Has the minister been furnished with any effective means of combatting this pest?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I may briefly outline the work that has been carried on under this expenditure, which is rather large. We have a staff in the field continuously at work not only on what might be called the animal insects, but also the fungous or vegetable insects. We have been dealing with the cut worm in certain sections of the country-a pest which is very destructive to field and garden crops. We have furnished farmers with a reliable remedy, based on a mixture of molasses and arsenic with some common body such as bran or other suitable material, and this has been found very effective indeed. With respect to the wire worm, we have found that it is necessary to take considerable time to study this insect as it requires about four years to complete its life history. So far we have found cultural methods most useful in dealing with this pest. In connection with the grasshopper plague which we have had in the West, we have found three particular varieties of grasshoppers doing considerable damage in the Prairie Provinces and also in the States to the south. We figure that in co-operation with the Provincial Governments we have this year saved agriculturalists in the province of Manitoba about $17,000,000 by adopting certain combative methods for overcoming the grasshopper plague; in Saskatchewan it is estimated that 1,400,000 acres were favourably affected by our treatment; and in Alberta our operations have also been extensive during the past year. In addition to carrying on this work our department conducted a number of experiments. One was with what is known as a hopper-dozer, drawn by a team and consisting of a vessel containing coal oil and other ingredients, in which the hoppers are captured as the machine is diawn across the fields. This, however, was found not to be nearly so effective as some of the other methods. We also carried on tests with chlorine gas, but found it very expensive, it costing at the rate of about $20 per acre. It has also this disadvantage that there is considerable danger in using it, and changing winds might have very disastrous results. Then, again, if the gas was heavily applied we found that it destroyed the vegetable matter which we hoped to save. The most satisfactory remedy was the baiting system, that is, where we used bran as the bait. Some of our men discovered that if 50 per cent of its bulk was made up of sawdust a considerable saving could be effected. We mixed this bait with molasses to attract the grasshoppers, and then added enough arsenic to kill them. In that way we have destroyed a very large number of these pests and found it the cheapest and most efficient system to handle. We have also, as I pointed out a moment ago, carried on a considerable amount of work in combatting the European corn borer. This parasite comes in from the United States and affects, some of the districts in Ontario where corn is grown to a considerable extent. The United States Government is so impressed with the seriousness of this parasite that last year they expended $400,000 in trying to prevent it reaching the corn belt and in stopping its ravages in those districts where it had already appeared. The fly lays its eggs on the corn plants, develops into a caterpillar and bores into the stalk of the corn and also up into the cob. We have given all the information we could in the various districts where the trouble has existed, and we have also issued 25,000 circulars dealing with the subject. We have also been dealing with the brown-tail moth, particularly in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, with considerable success. It has been found practicable to import certain pests that prey on this particular insect. We sent men to the United States to study the work done there in that connection, and a number of these parasites were brought here and released in districts where the brown-tail moth was causing trouble. We have also been dealing lately with what is known as the apple-sucker, a parasite supposed to be recently imported from Europe. We sent out a number of men to investigate the action of the army worm. We used poisonous remedies as in the case of grasshoppers, and also advocated the ploughing and digging of

moderately deep trenches into which the army worm would fall when travelling across the ground-a mechanical method of fighting the pest. These suggestions on the part of the department have been found very helpful. We have also done excellent work in connection with the testing of various insecticides. As I have pointed out, the results in connection with the grasshopper work have been very satisfactory. It is estimated by the department that we have saved the farmers over $400,000 during the past season by suggesting cheaper remedies that were just as efficient as those that were used the year before. We are also carrying on inspection of nursery stock. We have fumigating plants at various points throughout the country- Vancouver; North Portal, Saskatchewan; Winnipeg; Windsor, Ontario; Niagara Falls; St. John, New Brunswick, and St. Johns, Quebec. All nursery stock coming from the United States must pass through these ports and is thoroughly fumigated before being released, our object being to prevent the introduction of the San Jose scale from the United States.
In connection with the botanical side, we are studying roots, vegetables and grains which are subject to the attacks of various fungi, and are disseminating such information in that regard as we are able to obtain from time to time. With regard to the increase of $10,000 this year, it is required to meet the re-classification, to provide for additional travelling expenses, additional expenses at our laboratories throughout the country, and also to carry on the corn borer .work-of course, we cannot tell ahead of time how much this work will cost. The increase is necessary also to cover any emergency that may arise during the coming year.
We have been doing excellent work in combatting the cabbage maggot and the rose midge. All who are interested in agriculture know what a considerable amount of damage is done by the cabbage maggot. Shortly after the cabbage is planted it wilts and falls over, the result of the work of a little maggot which attacks the root, cuts off the stalk and ultimately destroys the plant. We handle that pest successfully by using a one to one-thousand solution of bichloride of mercury, or common corrosive Sublimate. We estimate that we have saved the cabbage growers and rose growers of Canada during the past year over $100,000 by suggesting these remedies. We have also done good work in experimenting with and then advocating the use of dust applications to overcome

[DOT]these parasites, instead of the ordinary old-fashioned sprays. The dust applications are more efficient and cost less.


James Alexander Robb: Did I understand the minister to say that in certain sections of country where they were purchasing bran for mixing, to be used in the destruction of grasshoppers, the bran contained a very large percentage of sawdust?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, I said that by experiment we had discovered that we could fool the grasshoppers by substituting fifty per cent, sawdust, making a substantial saving.


Mr. GOULD:: This question has been one of particular interest to the people of my district since 1918. In that year the southern part of the district was invaded by grasshoppers and for miles from the international boundary the crop was totally destroyed. Just about that time the Winnipeg strike was on, and we were therefore unable to secure supplies of arsenate of lead and Paris green for the purpose of destroying or preventing the spread of these insects which were coming into the district from North Dakota. We also found when we began to seek ways and means of combatting this evil that our departments in Canada were not as well advised of the necessary measures to adopt as were the experimental farms in North Dakota. As a matter of fact, two weeks before the information reached us from our own Department of Agriculture we got from the state of North Dakota and put into application the method of distribution of poisoned feeds over the affected areas. That is one reason why we are interested in seeing that means are provided whereby our scientific research department here may be able to carry on its work and find out the means of fighting these pests which attack our crops in the West. I myself am particularly interested because I have been affected to the extent of the loss of some thousands of dollars during the last three years. I have, however, much praise for our department on account of the hearty cooperation they gave the provincial authorities least year in combatting these evils. The increase of $10,000 in the Estimates this year should be commended by the committee. I brought this question up a few nights ago because I thought that the sum of $8,000 in the preceding item meant an increase in salaries for those who were devoting their time to research matters. I support the view that the policy of the Government should be one of retrenchment; yet after listening to the frequent declara-

tions made by hon. members with regard to the importance of agriculture, I am somewhat disappointed to find that expenditures on agriculture are limited in the Estimates to approximately $5,000,000, while the expenditures for, say, the Department of Militia amount to $11,750,000. That is not bearing out in practice that which is preached in theory. If I were as big a man intellectually and physically as the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Finance would not frighten me; I would demand that agriculture receive its proper share of the appropriations. I have received many letters from my people in my constituency demanding a more equitable distribution of the funds available and asking that agriculture should receive its share. I repeat that our people heartily approve the efforts that are being put forth by the Department of Agriculture in an effort to combat the pests that are attacking our crops. I believe this evil is largely extant in our country because the minister is circumscribed in his sphere or in the amount of capital he has to invest in combatting it. While I am prepared to support a general policy of retrenchment, yet I believe the proportions are absolutely unfair to the great industry of agriculture in this country.


Mr. FOURNIER:: I have a little bit of criticism to offer to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie), not that he is not spending money, but that he is not spending enough money for agricultural purposes. I have the same complaint as the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) has. The amount spent yearly for the destruction of destructive insects is a miserable pittance, when we realize that parasites are destroying crops to an amount estimated at $125,000,000 yearly. The amount expended for good seed is altogether too small when one considers that an increase of one bushel per acre in Canada's crop would add about $80,000,000 to the country's wealth, and that is something worth considering. As regards the amount expended for agricultural instruction, it is a shame that such a small amount should be asked. In the midst of the social and economic battles which are being fought between nations in order to regain their equilibrium there is no more important and essential problem than that of agriculture. For the last six years, the great cry has been "Back to the land", that is to say, b*ack to the economic truth. That cry has been heard by sound economists, bankers, railroad directors and business men
generally, but what do we find? With such a small amount expended for agriculture, we find that the tide for the last thirty years has been flowing to the cities, and I submit, Sir, the more farmers, the more of everything,-railways, factories, towns, cities, churches, colleges, art schools, conservatories, music and all the apparatus and appurtenances of the highest civilization, The Government apparently does not desire such a condition, and with a lack of encouragement, the rural population is fast declining.
Agriculture should be the domain of high politics, politics of the first order, and I ask the minister, when he goes to the Council chamber, as solid as he is, to have the Estimates of his department approved, not to be too shy with his colleagues. If I were in his place, I would soon get a little money out of the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Militia, and the Minister of Railways and Canals. In private or in public affairs nothing goes forward if one is not able to display the necessary will, even to the point of being audacious. All those who work for the future must determine the scope of individual will and collective will as well. To move the collective will, politics should formulate, on essential points, principles and reforms that all groups must admit. It is necessary that vital questions should not fall the prey of faction, nor of ambitions. And vital: questions are those which make national: greatness and prosperity,-the moral value-of population, social justice and material prosperity. To bring collective will to these questions, politics must bring forward sentiments and common interests, sentiments of generosity, justice and courage, interests of social and economic order. I commend these words to the minister.
Before resuming my seat, I wish to make a slight reference to a statement made by the hon. member for Dufferin (Mr. Best), when he was at his "best" yesterday evening. The hon. gentleman stated that many hon. gentlemen speak of farming when they know absolutely nothing about it. I must differ from that statement, so far as my part of the country is concerned. We closely observe the eleventh commandment which says: "Thou shalt mind thine own business." We do not care who goes on the land, whether it is an honourable judge, a lawyer, a physician, a notary or anyone else; in fact, we welcome anyone on the land, and we know that many things that are to-day employed in agriculture were not invented by farmers. The man who invented Paris green was a chemist,

but Paris green is used extensively on the farm for the protection of the potato. The man who invented formalin is another chemist; and many presidents and officials of agricultural colleges do not farm for themselves. I commend these words to my hon. friend. I have not asked the minister for an experimental farm; I know he has not the money; but when he goes to the Council chamber and gets a little more money from his colleagues, if I am still a member of this House next year, he will hear from me when he comes before us with his Estimates again, if he has not more money to spend for agriculture.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: I am sure, after listening to the statement made by the Minister of Railways and Canals, (Mr. Reid) this afternoon, we must all feel that we cannot very consistently advocate an increase in expenditure for anything we can possibly get along without. I realize, however, that this is a very important item, and the work that can be done is certainly very great. I do not very often appropriate to myself credit for anything to which I am not entitled; but I believe if I have convinced the minister and the Government of the efficacy of bran for poisoning grasshoppers, I have done something during the time I have been in this House. If there iS on hand any of the old bran, such as was used during the last few years, he should get a monopoly of it, put a little molasses on it and scatter it out. I think it will destroy most of the grasshoppers.
Perhaps the pest about which I wish to speak might more properly have come under the item which we have just passed. I refer to the white grub which is very prevalent in Ontario and which has destroyed vast areas of pasture land. I believe the department has an officer at Strathroy in East Middlesex. Can the minister give the committee any information as to the possibilities of combatting this pest that is destroying thousands of acres of the old pasture lands? In fact, the new land also that a few years ago was covered with a beautiful sod has been absolutely destroyed by this pest, and the land is now covered with weeds. I believe the white grub larvae is laid by what is commonly called the June bug, which we see flying around in such large numbers in the month of June. I think it would be well to have the experts inquire whether anything can be done to destroy this pest, and I should like to know what reports the minister has received on the matter from the officer at Strathroy, in which section of the country vast areas have been

converted to grazing purposes during the past few years. This is a serious matter in those districts, because these lands have to be broken up and again brought under cultivation.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I rgret I cannot give
the hon. member any information as to the investigations that are now being carried on, but if this pest is creating as much trouble as my hon. friend says, I shall take steps to familiarize myself with the conditions at once, and see that such measures are taken as may be advisable under the circumstances. An investigation is going on, but I do not know just what stage it has reached.
Answering the question of my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Fournier), I am pleased to note he realizes the importance of agriculture in Canada. Certainly, there is a very great field for development. Agriculture, to use a western expression, "is Canada's one best bet." I might point out that while during the last five years our appropriations for agriculture have been in the neighbourhood of three millions a year, or slightly more, this year we are appropriating between five and six millions, which is a decided increase.
With regard to what my hon. friend from Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) has said about the grasshopper plague, we maintain a man in Manitoba at Treesbank and keep in close touch with the grasshopper work at all times. South of the line, where they have an earlier spring, it is only natural the Americans should get busy a little sooner than we do. So far as our staff is concerned, I think it is a very excellent one. It was organized by the late Dr. Hewitt, whose value was almost inestimable, but who unfortunately was lost to us by his untimely death about a year ago. He was making a reputation for himself throughout the whole world as one of its leading entomologists. He established our branch and brought it up to its present state of efficiency. We are doing our utmost to maintain that efficiency, and I am quite sure that the staff we have now will compare very favourably with that of any other similar branch in the world.


James Alexander Robb: Would the minister make
a statement as to the duplication of work by the federal and provincial Departments of Agriculture? I notice in the minister's own publication, dated December, 1920, that full credit for combatting the grasshopper plague is given to the Department of Agriculture of the province of Saskatchewan. I gathered to-day from the minister that it was his department that did the work.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I thought I was very
clear in stating that we hade done this work in co-operation with the Provincial Governments. We maintain a staff of experts here in Ottawa who study these various insects, and are able to give very valuable information as to the methods that should be adopted. The life history of a number of parasites has been studied, because you must know their history before you can suggest any remedy. We have also assisted the provinces in experimental work with the various appliances, such as gas, the doser, and various insecticides. We also had men on the ground giving-advice and studying the whole situation, and the provinces get the full benefit of any information they may gather.


James Alexander Robb: Are not the taxpayers in
some cases paying the salaries of two men where one might do the work?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Our men do the directing, and offer the results of the information they have gathered. There is no duplication of the staff we maintain here in any one of the provinces. The provinces carry out most of the work, and put up most of the expense.
Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough) 4 Do fumigation stations come under this heading?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes.


John Ewen Sinclair: How many are there in Nova Scotia?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: None now; there used to
be one at Digby. Our station is now located at St: John, N.B.


John Ewen Sinclair: I have been informed that
plants coming from nurseries in the province of Ontario to Nova Scotia have to be sent to Digby to be fumigated. My own experience in getting roses for my garden has been that the insects are killed so effectually that the plants themselves are dead when they arrive. If this matter is not in the minister's department, I have nothing to say about it.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There were stations at
Digby and Truro, maintained in co-operation with the Provincial Government, but that agreement has expired, and we are not doing business at either of these points now. Our station in the Maritime Provinces is at St. John.


John Ewen Sinclair: Then plants coming to Nova
Scotia from Ontario nurseries must first go to St. John, N.B., to be fumigated?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Not necessarily. They
can go direct to the purchaser in Nova Scotia, unless Nova Scotia provides otherwise. It is plants coming from the United States that we fumigate.


John Ewen Sinclair: I was speaking of plants coming from the city of Hamilton, in Ontario. I would suggest to the minister that if his department is going to continue that work, the most convenient point in Nova Scotia would be truro. It takes considerable time to send goods to Truro to Digby and back again to Truro, and then on to their destination. The plants are delayed so long on the way that it is injurious to them. I have not been able to understand how under the past arrangement Truro was not utilized instead of Digby, especially in shipments to eastern Nova Scotia.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That inter-provincial
trade is all taken care of by the Provincial Governments. I shall be very glad, however, to look into my hon. friend's suggestion with regard to Truro.


Mr. CURRIE:: In the early part of this session members were deluged with a very alarming pamphlet about the prevalance of what is known as the bud worm in the spruce forests of Canada. As the exports of spruce products from this country amount to between forty and fifty million dollars a year, one would be led to believe by this pamphlet that in ten years all our forests would be destroyed. What department is that under? As we are now on an item which virtually covers it, may I ask if there is any department of the Government taking,steps to stop that pest? I understand that it was in Quebec and is now in the Timiskaming region of Ontario. It is destroying the forest right and left, and I should like to know what, if anything, the Dominion Government is doing in the matter.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There is at present a staff studying the spruce bud worm, and as soon as we have information available of any value we shall be glad to publish' it. Indeed, we shall do that from time to time.


Mr. McDERMAND:: What particular form of the European corn worm is affecting Ontario? This strikes me as a very important matter, and as a considerable quantity of seed is procured from affected districts to supply the rest of Ontario, it

would be well to know whether the disease x is conveyed in the seed.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The European corn borer is a dangerous parasite and one that has created considerable alarm in the United States. We are alive to its importance, and I can assure my hon. friend that a staff is kept combatting it during the season. As regards its treatment, we advise cutting the crop as low as possible, cleaning up all debris and burning it, and then ploughing the land. The disease is not conveyed by the corn seed once it has been shelled, but there is a danger in shipping unshelled corn from affected districts. That, however, is prevented by our officers. We have been studying the question with care, and purpose giving it still closer study during the coming summer.


Sydney Smith McDermand: I understand that those counties under quarantine are not allowed to ship seed at the present time. Will that regulation be continued?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: They are not allowed to ship seed on the cob. Future quarantines, I may say, will be enforced so long as we think the precaution necessary, that is to say, as developments occur.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am much obliged to the minister for the exhaustive information he has given us concerning the way in which he is battling with the farmers' enemies in the shape of insects. We have in Nova Scotia, and particularly in the part of the province from which I come, one enemy to which I shall now refer. There may be a special name for it in scientific nomenclature, but it is vulgarly known as the potato bug. It is a very destructive insect, and causes considerable damage. Is any progress being made towards exterminating this particularly troublesome pest, which largely destroys a splendid article of food? I know we have in Nova Scotia, under the provincial department of Agriculture, possibly with some assistance from the Dominion Government, demonstrators who go through the country showing the farmers how things can be done in various ways to improve agriculture; but I am not aware that they have been demonstrating any very effective means of wiping out this enemy of the farmer. When a man is advised to settle on the land in our part of the country he replies that he sees no good in going on the farm because, when he plants cabbages, or potatoes, these insects destroy them, rendering much hard labour absolutely futile, and that it is therefore

not inviting to take up land. Now, we certainly want every man we can get to go on the farm, and we should put every means at his disposal to overcome these pests. I want to know especially what is being done to get rid of this potato bug. I understand that the germ stays in the soil from year to year, and perhaps some
5 p.m. method might be found

I do not know whether any has been devised so far-of treating the soil in order to kill the germ. Perhaps the minister will inform the committee on this point.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We give demonstrations
in the use of both liquid and dust sprays to overcome fungoid diseases in potatoes, of which there are about half a dozen, and among other pests we encounter the potato bug. The treatment costs about a dollar or a little more per acre, including labour and material. What is known as the potato spraying machine is used; it covers several rows at a time. This particular pest cannot be controlled, so far as I know, by any treatment of the soil, but the other remedies I have mentioned, while not costly, are, I think, highly efficient.


Mr. DECHENE:: The member for Cape
Breton (Mr. McKENZIE), raised an interesting question in his reference to the potato bug, and I am sure the minister is aware of another potato disease, which is known in French as " la glande noire ". Last fall, in our part of Quebec, a large portion of the potato crop was lost as a result of this plague. Perhaps the minister will inform us what is being done by the Government in the way of co-operation with the provincial department of Agriculture in order to overcome, or at all events, to restrict, as far as possible, this harmful disease. Sometimes one takes up a potato that looks perfect, but on cutting it one finds several black rings in it. A farmer may store in the fall a crop of potatoes that have every appearance of soundness, but in a few months the whole thing begins to rot, and by January or February there is little of the crop left. If this plaugue is not checked, in Quebec and in other provinces as well, in a few years' time our potato output will be seriously diminished. I suppose the minister is aware of this trouble and if anything is being done by his department in the matter, I should like to have an assurance from him to that effect.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: In connection with these
diseases, I may inform my hon. friend that we issue information from time to time. Furthermore, we have inspectors in the

different districts who, besides giving information to the farmers, co-operate with the representatives of the departments of agriculture in the various provinces. These different varieties of rot are dealt with by proper spraying. In the first place, there is a careful selection of seed, which is examined for traces of the disease. Having assured yourself that you have good seed a rotation of crops should be followed so that you shall not next year plant potatoes on land that has been infected with one of these diseases. Place that land under some other crop and follow out a regular rotation. By following a rotation, adopting proper spraying, and making careful selection of the seed the matter can be remedied to a very great extent.


Mr. MICHAUD:: Are there inspectors
in the Maritime Provinces who are taking charge of importations of potato seed? Because sometines bad seed is brought in from the United States and it is highly desirable that our growers should be protected against such seed.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We have a regular system of inspection of seeds, and the persons purchasing these seeds must protect themselves to the best of their ability, or consult our men and secure information from many of our establishments where they can get it for nothing. The information will be given to them freely and they will be instructed to purchase their seeds from those districts where good seed is procurable. There are certain sections of Canada where it is easily possible to obtain clean, pure seed, particularly in the newer districts-seed produced from plants grown on new land. By following the simple rules which I have indicated the farmer can protect himself fully. In addition to that we shall be glad at any time to furnish information in the shape of printed matter with regard to these potato diseases. To secure that information the farmer need only make application to the Central Experimental Farm.


John Allister Currie: I may say that the growing of potatoes is quite an industry in the riding which I represent, and it is a marked success. The Ontario Government have published a pamphlet on the growing of potatoes, describing how to take the seed and dip it in a solution that will destroy any germs that may be present in the seed. After the potatoes are planted, the growers are told how to treat them with solutions- for instance Bordeaux mixture and arsenate of lead. That is what they now employ largely instead of paris green where it is desired to grow potatoes in any quantity. The pamphlet referred to is an excellent one, and gives full particulars to anyone who wishes to grow potatoes. I do not know whether the pamphlet is published in French or not; nor I do not know whether the federal Department of Agriculture has published a pamphlet of a similar character. I believe they have issued one which is virtually the same. I am sure that the information given to the farmers in these pamphlets has increased the quantity of potatoes grown per acre fully fifty per cent. It is now known, after experimental work, that when potatoes have been treated several times with the common Bordeaux mixture there is no likelihood of danger to them at all, no matter what the soil conditions were previously. That shows the good work which has been done by these institutions to which I am alluding and speaks well for them. I have listened to a great deal of criticism from hon. members opposite with respect to the work of the Department of Agriculture since these Estimates have been under consideration. It is the first time in my experience in the House that a Minister of Agriculture has been criticized in this way or has been found fault with on account of the amount of money which he has expended. Now, I hope that no hon. member in this Chamber will find fault with the money spent in this direction. The Central Experimental Farm at Ottawa alone, by reason of its discovery of Marquis wheat has added some millions of dollars to the value of the grain crop of Canada; in fact it has yielded results that would pay for the cost of the farm more than a thousand times. Then, too, through the discovery of Banner oats by the Ontario Department of Agriculture, thousands of bushels of oats have been added to the oat acreage of Canada, and sufficient money derived therefrom to pay for the entire work of that department. I speak of the work performed by the department of the province of Ontario because I was associated for some time after I entered parliamentary life with the former Minister of Agriculture of the province, Hon. James Duff, who recently died. It may be a surprise to many members in this House to know that to the late Hon. James Duff is due the credit of establishing the system of district representatives which is resulting in so much good to the cause of agriculture not only in Canada but in the



United States. The late Mr. Duff was the first Minister of Agriculture in the world to appoint district representatives. He took young men from college and placed them in various sections of the country so that there would be one in each district. These young men selected experimental plots; they taught the farmers how to spray their apples, how to grow corn, how to spray their potatoes, how to judge their cattle; and so they caused a revolution in the work of agriculture throughout the province of Ontario. The initiation of that work was due to the late Mr. Duff, when he was Minister of Agriculture for Ontario. I want that justice to be done to his memory; I want it known that he was the man who initiated that system. It was so good a system that it has been copied all over the United States. You cannot take up any American paper but you will read about these district representatives and the wonderful work they have done. All this work was first begun in the province of Ontario. Then the system of co-operation amongst the farmers was first put into effect in the province of Ontario. Hon. Mr. Duff established farmers' clubs where the farmers could meet and talk together and inaugurate co-operative marketing and work of that character. I am very sorry to say that after these clubs were instituted some people, more influenced by politics than common sense, turned the majority of these organizations into political clubs instead of retaining them as farmers' clubs which they formerly were. It never was intended by Mr. Duff when he established the farmers' clubs that they should become centres of discontent. I know that otjier clubs have been established throughout the country. The West has followed the footsteps of Ontario, and in many cases they have gone one better. The knowledge that is being disseminated through the various provinces is owing to the efforts of students who have passed through the College of Agriculture of Ontario. Take the United States and you can scarcely go to a state and ask "who founded this agricultural college?" but you will be told "so-and-so from the Ontario College of Agriculture." These men have led the way in the development of agricultural knowledge and work, and not sufficient credit has been given to them. They did not work for any political purpose; they worked to benefit humanity and to promote the interests of the farmer. To-day there is a great deal of outcry about the "poor farmer." We have had 
politicians going all through the country, especially in my own riding, crying out, "Oh, the poor farmer; the farmer has such a poor time farming in Ontario." Now the province of Ontario produces more farming wealth than any other province, and yet what happens? The late Minister of Agriculture for Canada stated not long ago that the farms of Ontario were deserted by the agriculturists, that the farmers were all going to the city. I say that is not true. The agriculturists from Ontario have gone West. The young man from the Ontario farm has shown his mettle in the West, and if you see a good farmer in the West you can depend upon it he is a young man from Ontario. That is where the surplus population from Ontario has gone. We do not begrudge the West those men. There is a certain amount of the population who will go to the city no matter what you do for them. I may say this for the benefit of the hon. gentleman who was the former Minister of Agriculture that I have for some time been taking the Fabian pamphlets published by the Socialists in London, and in one pamphlet after another and as a means of causing discontent among the farmers you find this question of rural depopulation raised. In fact the English socialists, the reds, over there are trying to cause all the trouble they can amongst the rural population of England. I wish further to say that the farms of Ontario and of the West would be worth exactly one hundred per cent more than they are to-day if we had less of these "whining Willies" going around and crying out about the poor farmer. The farmer organizations in the United States do not discuss such questions and cry aloud what poor people they are. Take the price of farm land in Wisconsin or Ohio-I have been in those states within the past few months-and take the price of farm land in the province of Ontario, which is nearer to good markets, and is superior to any kind of farms they have got over there. What do you find? You find farms in Ohio and Wisconsin selling at $300 an acre; but you do not find farms in Ontario selling at half that figure.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend forgets the difference in population.


John Allister Currie: There is no difference
whatever. I have been on those fawns and know their size and quality; they are not any larger or better than any we have in Ontario.


James Alexander Robb: They have a larger market


John Allister Currie: Nothing of the kind. The best farmers' market in the world is in the city of Toronto.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


John Allister Currie: Hon. members may laugh, but I know; I live in the city of Toronto and I have to pay the price. Why, in Toronto eggs are always higher than they are in Chicago or in Buffalo; and so with the price of potatoes and other farm produce-there is a market right at the farmers' door. Everything he produces he can find a ready sale for in Hamilton, Toronto and other large centres. To my mind the man who goes around drawing a long face for the farmers of Ontario is wasting his time, and I think if a little more boosting was done for those farmers in regard to their land, cattle and crops it would be much better for them than the shedding of all these tears. These tears are simply for the purpose of boosting some political party. If you go along the roads and look at the fine brick farm houses and bank barns, you will discover on inquiry that their owners are not politicians, they are usually men supporting this side of the House; but if you find a tumbledown farmhouse and a barn with the roof off you may be certain that the owner is going around the country talking politics all the time.


Georges Henri Boivin: Order. I must draw the attention of the hon. member to the [DOT] fact that we are discussing item 42.


John Allister Currie: I bow to your ruling,
Mr. Chairman. I suppose we should come back to the bug question. I was dealing with political bugs rather than the bugs that are so destructive to our farmers. I do not think that the Minister of Agriculture has yet found a cure for the political bug, but I hope the farmers themselves will apply the proper remedy. The work done by the Dominion Department of Agriculture and the provincial departments of agriculture is not overlapping. The two departments work together in Ontario. There is the experimental department, and there are also the demonstration farms which are controlled by the Ontario Government. There is lots of room for improvement in every direction, and the less groaning and wailing there is about the lot of the farmer the happier he will be and the more work he will do. Why all this shouting about the sad condition the farmer is in to-day? We are told that a farmer will say: I am only going to put half my land under crop this year. What
m
a terrible thing to cause all this outcry! I think it is a crime to allow bugs to grow either of the political or of the field kind; and it seems to me that the sooner we "get down to brass tacks" so far as the farmer is concerned and leave him a chance to speak for himself, and not have the grain speculators speak for him, the better it will be for the country at large.


Mr. MOLLOY:: I would advise the hon.
member for North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) to allow the Minister of Agriculture to speak for himself. I am sure the minister does not object to wholesome criticism of his Estimates, and I think if the hon. member will consult him he will say that he has been fairly used; and we on this side of the House all agree that we have been fairly used. We are asking for certain information in the interest of the people of this country, and my hon. friend in his tirade about our criticism of the minister is wasting time in saying nothing when he might have remained silent and allowed the minister to give us the information asked for. He has been making a sort of manufacturers' speech and attacking the farmers. The farmers are interested in what the Minister of Agriculture has put forth; the manufacturers are not interested to the same extent. So far as the province of Ontario is concerned, one would think, after listening to the hon. member, that that province was the whole earth. Now, Ontario may produce the finest looking men, the most beautiful women, the best horses, so on and so forth, but there are other places in the Dominion of Canada; there is the Great West and there is Eastern Canada. Some people run away with the idea that because they are from the province of Ontario that is the whole thing. I want to tell my hon. friend that although I was born in that province, there are farmers in the other provinces just as good as any' man who ever came from the province of Ontario.
Mr; MAHARG: No doubt hon. members will expect me to talk about political bugs, but that is not the subject before the House at the present time. The hon. member for North Simcoe has sown a little seed about political bugs. Well, we will let them germinate, and when the proper time comes we will deal with that particular kind of bug. A few minutes ago the minister informed the committee that he had lost the services of a very valuable man in connection with the work that this item has reference to. I wonder if he would care to express his opinion as to

just why he lost that very valuable official?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Mr. Chairman, the official died.


Mr. MAHARG:: I am sorry that is the
answer. Still, there are other officials that the minister has lost from different causes. I have been looking over these Estimates; and while, Mr. Chairman, it may be a little out of order, yet the loss of officials of this department probably is of interest in connection with any of the items covered by the Estimates of the minister's department. I find that the salaries paid to officials and other employees in this department are very discouraging indeed. In one instance, where I think there can be no difference whatever in the character or degree of the work, I find that filing clerks in some other departments are paid $360 per year more than they are paid in this department. Has the minister anything to say at all in fixing the salaries of his staff?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Mr. Chairman, as I
pointed out yesterday, these salaries are fixed by the Civil Service Commission.


John Archibald Maharg: You have nothing to
say in the way of recommending increases to the staff to make the salaries equal to those of officials in other departments doing similar work?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: As a minister I do not
have any recommendations to make in regard to those salaries, they are fixed by the Civil Service Commission. In fact, I think you will find that it is rather against the law for the minister to take any steps along those lines.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dairying, $175,000.
Mr. LEGER:: I would like some information as to the disposition of this amount. In New Brunswick, we have several butter and cheese factories, and in the interests of the whole country I would like to see more of those factories in operation. We have one such factory in my county, not far from where I live, and it is doing very good work. In Moncton there is a co-operative dairy establishment which makes the butter for parts of the counties of Kent, Albert and Westmoreland. It is a great enterprise, and deserves much credit for the Work which it is doing. I think we should encourage 'as much as possible the butter and cheese industries all through the province. I would like to know whether this vote is to encourage such industries, or is it simply to pay the butter inspectors who travel around the country?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Last year the value of
our dairy products was $252,000,000, the largest, I think, in the history of the country. The Dairy Branch is under the supervision of Mr. J. A. Ruddick, a man well known to dairymen all over Canada; a man whose reputation as an expert is world-wide. The showing for this year is, I think, very creditable indeed. As to the work which is carried on, I may say that we maintain at Finch, Ontario, an establishment for the manufacture of dairy products under ordinary commercial conditions, and I am pleased to say that this establishment, although Government-owned, pays a profit. We also have men who are engaged in promoting the cow-testing associations throughout the country. As hon. members are aware, no one can tell the yield of a cow by looking at her; very often a farmer, even one who is an expert, may be under the impression that his best cows are his fattest ones. When he takes advantage of these testing operations, he is in a position to know from which cows he is getting the best results, and may then profitably discard those which do not come up to what he considers to be a fair standard for profit. That line of work has done splendid service for the dairy industry, not only on this continent but also in Europe, particularly in Denmark, where it has been very thoroughly followed out. Down in New Brunswick we have men travelling about and promoting these various cow testing associations; Mr. Gaudet is one of them. The creameries and dairy organizations are under the supervision of the various provincial governments. We have a butter grader at the Port of Montreal, and we have five representatives in Great Britain, which is our best dairy market. We are doing all we can to ensure that our dairy products sold overseas shall be of the highest possible standard. We feel that when we are in competition with such countries as Denmark and Ireland we must maintain a high standard for our products if we are to be successful. In connection with the butter grading at the port of export, it is our intention to take steps to Provide for an increased production and to ensure the better carrying on of the work. We propose also to appoint a dairy demonstrator, a person who will travel about the country from place to place demonstrating the value of dairy products as food, in comparison with other foods ordinarily found on the table. This person will also give demonstrations and exhibitions, make exhibits of dairy products

or assist in making them, with a view to giving the consumer the fullest possible information as to the value of the products of the cow. This has been very successfully done in other countries. We are also carrying on practical experiments and investigations with regard to the various forms of manufacture. We propose to begin as soon as possible the manufacture of certain lines of cheese that are now generally imported-lines that are a little out of the ordinary; lines that we pay a very high price for in this country and which can be produced here just as well as in other countries. We feel that this will be a distinct encouragement to the dairy industry. We also carry on a system of cargo inspection at Montreal and Halifax. We administer the Dairy Act and the Oleomargarine Act. During the past year the convictions made for violations of the Oleomargarine Act were 12 in number and those in connection with the Dairy Act, 128; in 1919 the figures were 8 and 111 respectively. We also issue daily market reports, so as to give full information to the producer regarding the condition of the markets from time to time. We make arrangements with the railways to assist producers in securing a refrigerator car service. This department also handles a cold storage system under the cold storage bonuses that are given, which are referred to in an item to be taken up later. That, roughly, is the scope of the work carried on by the Dairy Branch. When you compare the value of the total dairy output for the year, $252,000,000, with the very modest appropriation asked for by the Department of Agriculture in connection with dairy work, you will agree that the proposed expenditure is not extravagant. It should also be remembered that we have something like 3,500,000 cows in this country which average less than 4,000 pounds each of milk a year. If that average was brought up to 7,000 pounds a year, the value of our dairy products would be tremendously increased. Nothing can render better service along this line than the cow testing associations and the improvement of our sires as carried out by the Live Stock Branch.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: Will the minister explain just what he means by cow-testing associations?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: A cow-testing association is an association organized by one of our representatives, the object being to offer to the farmer an opportunity whereby, under certain conditions, he can send
samples of milk to a creamery with which our department has already made an arrangement, and have that milk tested from time to time as to its butter-fat content. In that way, he is able to eliminate cows that are low in butter-fat. Some cows will run as low as 2 per cent in butter fat in the summer time when they are on the grass, in the flush-flow of milk. Some cows will give as high as 6 per cent of butter fat. By weighing his milk daily and marking the weight down in a chart, and by having that milk tested from time to time, the farmer is able to move out from his herd or dispose of in some other way cows that are unprofitable for the dairy business. By the use of a good sire and by the selection of his best cows, he can often double, in a short time, the output of his herd.


Mr. PROULX:: Are those tests carried
out at experimental farms or illustration stations?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: This testing is done
throughout the country. We make arrangements with creameries in almost every district where cow-testing associations are established.


Mr. KENNEDY (Glengarry and Stormont) :: I do not rise to criticize in any
way the appropriations for which the minister is asking, because I think, in view of the work which he has outlined and which I know is being accomplished, the appropriation is a very modest one. I *should like, however, to ask him if he has anything in view for the coming year as to the grading of cheese at the point of export?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We are grading cheese
at Montreal now, and we propose to extend the work in the near future.


Mr. CALDWELL:: What steps will a
farmer in any locality have to take in order to get a cow-testing association?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: If he will be good enough to drop a line to Mr. Ruddick, Dairy Commissioner, Mr. Ruddick will be very pleased to furnish full information; or the hon. member could write to Mr. Gaudet, who is in his own province.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: The minister has just stated that our best market is in England. How much butter was exported to Great Britain during last season?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I am sorry I can not give that off hand.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: Can the minister state about how many million pounds approximately?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: About 10,000,000 pounds.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: Do we export more to the United States than to Great Britain?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, our greatest field of export is Great Britain.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cold storage warehouses, $26,000.
Auguste Théophile Léger: 
Mr. LEMIEUX:: Before the minister
answers the hon. member for Kent, N.B. (Mr. Leger)-the other day I drew the attention of the House to the question of refrigerator cars for the transportation of fish; but as we are now discussing this item, I am reminded that some years ago my hon. friend's predecessor, the Hon. Sydney Fisher, had organized a system of refrigerators for use in the fishing districts of the country. I do not know how those establishments have fared; but from complaints which I have received from the Gulf of St. Lawrence, it seems that they have not been a success. During the last few months, probably during the last two years, some gentlemen have organized cooperative societies in my county, the county

of Gaspe, and I believe that if the organization already in the department for the establishment of those freezers, was transferred to those co-operative societies, perhaps they might be more successful in their operation than they have been in the past. This is a matter of great interest for the fishing communities of the counties of Gaspe and Bonaventure, and the north shore of the St. Lawrence. In those refrigerators they can do two things-preserve the bait when the bait is abundant and, preserve the fish until it is shipped either by cars or by boat to centres such as Quebec, Montreal, Three Rivers and even as far as Toronto and Central Canada generally. On the coast of Gaspe, there are times when, as I stated a moment ago, herring, which is used as bait, or squid, is very abundant; but as they come by schools, they also disappear by schools, and then the fishermen are running about to get bait in order to catch fish which is always very abundant on the banks nearby. It is proposed to have those freezers as reservoirs for the bait of the fishermen in case of need, so that, as operations do not last long, because the seasons are short in that part of the gulf of St. Lawrence, the fishermen will be given an opportunity of going on steadily with their fishing operations; and, second, the consumption of our fish in the centres of Canada will be encouraged. If fish can be kept fresh where it is caught and can be easily shipped, it would be to the advantage of the consumer. Fish is a very wholesome article of food, and I notice with pleasure that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries has instituted a Fish Day for Canada. Of course, we who belong to the Roman Catholic church have our weekly fish day, and we know that a fish diet is very wholesome, not only from the religious, but also from the physical point of view. The consumption of fish ought to be encouraged, but if we wish to encourage its use as a food all over Canada the Government must be prepared to help the fishermen, and have the fishing community use refrigerators such as were started a few years ago by the Department of Agriculture, but which for some reason or other were not a success. I think that now, in view of the existence of these co-operative societies, which in the long run will be a great success with our people, the department would do well to consider whether it would not be feasible to adapt their machinery for refrigeration purposes to those of the co-operative societies.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Coming from a seacoast province I fully agree with what the hon.

gentleman has said concerning fish as a food and its desirability on the table, bat I think the matter he refers to really comes within the purview of the Department of Marine and Fisheries rather than that of Agriculture. Under our Cold Storage Act as amended some time ago, our assistance is only given to municipally-owned cold storage plants. With regard to what my hon. friend from Kent (Mr. Leger) had to say with reference to the establishment of a cold storage plant in the Maritime Provinces, at Halifax, I am sorry that he was not included on the committee at that time. The committee, I thought, was selected very carefully. Did I understand him to say that he had received no intimation from the chairman?


Auguste Théophile Léger: That is it.


Mr. McMASTER:: He was chosen but not called.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We have looked into this matter vary carefully. We sent representatives of the Live Stock Branch to the Maritime Provinces to look into the supply of live stock that would be necessary to maintain a cold storage plant and abattoir. We found on investigation that the volume of the supply would not be sufficient, and on the recommendation of our Live Stock Commissioner we have assisted in the co-operative marketing of livestock down there, and in stimulating its production. Marketing is one of our principal features, because I have always felt that farmers will produce if they believe they can sell at a reasonable profit. We hope that just as soon as the volume increases sufficiently to warrant it, a cold storage plant may be established in some spot in that section of the country. When we take into consideration the export of dressed beef, there is no doubt that a large cold storage plant situated down there would be of the greatest importance. It has been suggested that cattle raised in Alberta and the Prairie Prov-vinces should be loaded on cars and slaughtered at Atlantic Ports, but I have not yet received sufficient information to convince me that that Would be a success. There are a good many objections. In the first place, a finished steer on the prairies will dress out about 60 per cent, of beef,, so on every steer weighing only one thousand pounds-and that would be a light steer-there would be 400 pounds of by-product, which might just as well be kept in the West. But undoubtedly if shipments became general, we would need a cold storage plant in that section of the country as an assembling plant before loading on the ships. I have known one well-known western shipper of dressed beef, located in Calgary, who had to return a whole train load of beef to Montreal to have it properly iced and taken care of because it did not connect with the vessel on the Atlantic. I can assure my hon. friend that we are studying that situation and its prospects. At the present time with the prevailing price of beef, we cannot overlook the competition of the Argentine. They are able to produce beef very much more cheaply than we can. We are quite alive to the subject, however, and as soon as there is a sufficient volume of business, I shall be glad to assist in the establishment of a cold storage plant in that part of the country.


Auguste Théophile Léger: The explanation given by
the minister, that the available supply would not be sufficient to justify the establishment of a cold storage plant, is satisfactory. I think, however, that everything should be done to encourage the farmers in that part of the country, and I am sure that a cold storage plant there would encourage the production: of beef. The production of beef cannot very well be increased at the present time, because we have not the facilities for receiving the meat. However, I am glad to learn that in a very short while when the available supply has increased, the minister will be glad to assist the farmers in that part of the country. I am sure that his statement will greatly encourage them.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I might point out that
any municipality, such as Halifax, can obtain assistance now from the Federal Government, to the extent of 35 per cent, in building a cold storage plant.


Pius Michaud: Have you only one cold storage in the Whole Maritime Provinces?


Mr. DUFF:: Do I understand the minister to say that under the Act assistance is given to the establishment of cold storage plants, but not to those intended for fish or fish products? If the plant that is contemplated to be built at Halifax is built, would it not be able to take care of the products of the sea? I should like to know whether under our present Act the minister cannot assist in the establishment of a cold storage plant for fish purposes?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Under our present Act
we are only granting assistance to municipalities. Some of them, I understand, do store fish. At all events, they can store anything they want in the way of fish. Un-

less an establishment is municipally controlled, wo do not give a grant. There is one firm down on the Atlantic that is asking for a grant. It applied for a grant before the war, but after receiving permission they were not able to fill their part of the contract owing to war conditions. That matter has been given favourable consideration, I understand, and they are going ahead but have not signed up as yet.


William Duff: Is that the business in
North Sydney, Cape Breton?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes.


William Duff: What grant will the Government give towards the establishment of that cold storage?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: About 35 per cent of the cost of the plant, on condition that it meets with the approval of our commissioner.


Mr. REID (Mackenzie) :: I am sorry to
hear the minister say that the grant is available only to , municipally-owned cold storages, because we have in Saskatchewan what is known as the Saskatchewan Creameries Limited, owned by the farmers cooperative concern, and they also provide a cold storage plant in connection with the creameries. I am a believer in public utilities, and when a municipality is slow to go into that business and a number of people co-operate and start enterprises of this kind, I think the minister should consider very seriously aiding such enterprises, because the idea of co-operation is spreading throughout Canada to-day. I trust the minister will seriously consider this matter. Does he think that the amount asked for, of $26,000, is sufficient to encourage the building of cold storage plants?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The present Act was not
always confined to municipalities, and in previous years we made grants in Saskatchewan, one in Moose jaw, one in Regina, one in Saskatoon, and one in Vonda. With regard to the appropriation asked for now, we are of opinion, judging from past years, that it will be sufficient to meet the present situation.


John Flaws Reid: Have the Saskatchewan Co-operative Creameries Ltd. asked for any moneys in connection with the cold storage plant being built at Yorkton?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: Mr. Chairman-


Georges Henri Boivin: It is now six o'clock.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: I desire to point out
that the item is not carried.


Georges Henri Boivin: No.
At six o'clock the committee rose and the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.

The House again in Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair.


William Duff: With regard to cold storage, in looking over the report of the Minister of Agriculture I noticed that under an Order in Council passed on May 26th, 1919, the payment of subsidies under the Act is limited to public cold storage warehouses directed and operated by the municipality, or other governing body. I understood from what the minister told me that a cold storage warehouse that was being erected or has been erected in Cape Breton is receiving aid. I wondered if that Order in Council had been rescinded, or under what statute the thirty-five per cent of the cost of this cold storage plant was being paid by the department.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The authority given under the old Cold Storage Act was not limited to municipalities, but about two years ago, I think, the Act was changed so as to apply to municipally-owned plants. Previous to that time this aid was given to privately owned plants.


William Duff: I understood that the cold
storage plant in Cape Bretpn is a new concern, and that it is only now being erected.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: As I explained before
dinner, this concern made application under the provisions of the Act and the application had been accepted previous to the war. Owing to the war conditions they were not able to carry out their plans. We have decided to allow them to go ahead, but up to the present they have not, I understand, signed up.


William Duff: What is the name of the
concern?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I am sorry I cannot give the name off-hand, but I will be very pleased to get the information for the hon. gentleman.


William Duff: Can the minister give some information as to the objects of these cold storage plants?
Mr, TOLMIE:	I understand they are
for all the ordinary purposes of cold storage -the storage of fresh fish, fruit, beef, eggs and other food commodities.


John Ewen Sinclair: There is a reference in the minister's report to an arrangement that is being made with the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal, with respect to a cold storage plant. Is the arrangement with them on the same principle as in the case of the cold storage plant in North Sydney?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The cold storage plant
being constructed in Montreal by the Harbour Commissioners is not receiving any assistance from us.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Fruit, $145,000.
Auguste Théophile Léger: I would like to know from the minister what this item is for. If it is intended for the purchase of fruit we on this side have not yet received any. However, I suppose the vote is for the purpose of encouraging fruit growing, but I would like to have some explanation in reference to it.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: This vote covers district fruit inspection, the travelling expenses of the fruit inspectors, office help, and certain experiments that we are carrying on in connection with cold storage fruit cars. We made some experiments last year in carrying fruit from British Columbia to eastern points. In doing so we used the ordinary brine tank car and we found that by making very simple changes it was very suitable for the carrying of fruit. We are also making demonstrations in various ways with regard to the production of fruit, and we are issuing market reports. During the shipping season from the Maritime Provinces we keep in close touch with the British market by cable, and we issue these market reports to all the people interested in shipping to that export market, which reports have been found of the greatest possible assistance. We are also helping to organize co-operative selling associations. Then there are expenses in connection with administering the Fruit Market and Sales Act. It will be remembered that last session we passed an Act regulating fruit packages and we hope in a very short time that small fruit packages will be of uniform size throughout the Dominion. We are rendering general assistance in every possible way to the industry, but particularly in helping along the successful marketing of our fruit products. We are also engaged in demonstrating the best methods of packing and spraying, as I have already described, and assisting in the exhibition of our fruits
in various places where we think it might tend to promote the sale of our fruit. Last year we had a meeting of fruit inspectors from all over Canada at which fruit conditions in the various provinces were fully considered. We find that this bringing together of representatives of fruit associations from different parts of Canada at intervals has had a very excellent effect in assisting in the sale of Canadian fruit, while a general discussion of the conditions with respect to fruit growing and packing all over Canada has been highly beneficial.


William Duff: Will the minister give us the names of the fruit inspectors for the province of Nova Scotia?


Mr. CHISHOLM (Inverness):: And also where they are located?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The inspectors for the Maritime Provinces are: A. S. Alcorn, Berwick, Nova Scotia; W. S. Potts, St. John, New Brunswick. The temporary inspectors are: S. C. Dimmock, Windsor, Nova Scotia; A. H. Milner, Annapolis Royal, N.S.; A. T. Morse, Bridgetown, N.S.; F. B. Westcott, Gaspereau, N.S.; W. J. Sangster, Falmouth, N.S.; J. B. Wilson, Waterville, N.S.; G. E. Hutchinson, Morristown, N.S.; G. A. LeCain, Annapolis Royal, N.S.; R. B. Neily, Middleton, N.S.; H. G. Woodworth, Berwick, N.S.; H. F. East, Melvern Sq., N.S.; S. B. Marshall, Clarence, N.S.; G. H. Ruffee, Wolfville, N.S.; W. P. Fox, Lower Gage-town, N.B.


William Duff: These inspectors seem to
be all located in two counties.


Pius Michaud: They are all in Nova
Scotia.


William Duff: And New Brunswick; but
I am speaking of Nova Scotia. I notice practically all these inspectors are located in the two counties of Annapolis and King's. It is quite true that perhaps the greater proportion of the fruit grown in Nova Scotia comes from those counties; but while I do not want to boast of my own county, still I think the minister must know that the county of Lunenburg is renowned for its fruit, and its quality is as good as that of the fruit grown in Annapolis and King's, although the quantity perhaps is not as large. It seems to me that we should have at least one inspector in my county, in justice to the fruit growers there,


Simon Fraser Tolmie: While these men happen to he located in these two counties as their home centres, their activities are by no means confined to those particular sections; they travel all through the province and visit every district where they can render active service to the fruit growers.


William Duff: That explanation leaves a
little food for thought. I was just wondering whether these men were appointed by the Civil Service Commission or under the old patronage system, for it seems rather strange that they should all be located in the two counties, although they have to travel all over the province. It would be cheaper for the country and be more satisfactory to the fruit growers to have those inspectors distributed throughout the province; for instance, there should be one or two located in the county of Lunenburg and one or two in the county represented by the Minister of Public Works.


Andrew Ross McMaster: They grow tomatoes
in that country.


William Duff: That was in the old days.
But a great deal of fruit is grown in several counties besides Annapolis and King's, and I would suggest to the minister the desirability of seeing if those inspectors cannot be located in various centres in the province instead of being all grouped together in one or two counties. While I am not speaking for my own county particularly, I may say that we have three or four fruit warehouses and have shipped thousands of barrels of apples to the Old Country, and it seems to me that we are entitled to at least one inspector in the county of Lunenburg. By distributing their inspectors throughout the province the department would save a great deal of expense incurred by their men travelling to and from their present centres. Looking over the list of the amounts paid last year for travelling expenses, I find that Mr. Alcorn's were $1,069.86, Mr. DeVany's $112.05, Mr. Harri's $608.45, Mr. Le Cain's $693.81, Mr. Milner's $581.42, Mr. Neily's $484.70, Mr. Vroom's $1,556.80, and Mr. Woodworth's $777.50. These were men located in Annopolis county. I think the minister will agree with me that that money was practically wasted, because if these men were located throughout the province their travelling expenses to and from points within their respective districts would be practically nil. There is between $7,000 and $8,000 expended by these men in travelling from King's and Annapolis counties all over the province (and that money might just as well have been saved. I would suggest to the minister taking up the matter

with the Civil Service Commission or the patronage committee, whichever it is, with a view to seeing if these men cannot be sent back to their farms and other men appointed in every county. That is the practical and businesslike way, and it would be in the interest of the fruit industry and of the country. Does not the minister think my suggestion a valuable one?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I have made a note of
the hon. member's suggestion. I may point out that nearly all of these men were appointed by the Civil Service Commission, and I presume that that commission selected them for their ability in their particular line of work. Naturally, those two counties being very largely engaged in fruit growing, the most able and experienced men would be easily secured in those particular sections. The fruit inspectors would visit those points in the province where the big crops were being grown so that they would have an opportunity for demonstration work in the way of spraying, packing, and so on. They do not devote their time to the counties in which they are located, but travel around so that they may give the fullest possible service whereever they are required in the province. With the present high cost of travel it is almost impossible to avoid a certain amount of expense in connection with the activities of these inspectors. However, I will look closely into the details, and if an improvement can be made I shall be very glad to follow the hon. member's suggestion.


William Duff: The minister said a moment ago that he thought these men were appointed by the Civil Service Commission because of their ability and knowledge of the fruit business, gained in their home counties. I want to say that in other counties in Nova Scotia there are just as capable men in the fruit growing business. I cannot understand how three commissioners sitting in the Hunter building in Ottawa can pick out men in Annapolis and King's who are thoroughly qualified to inspect fruit in the province of Nova Scotia. To my mind the minister or his deputy is the right and proper man to pick out these inspectors, and not Dr. Roche, Mr. Jameson and Col. Larochelle. The quicker we get back to first principles in the appointment of these men the better it will be for this country. I do not know how these inspectors were chosen, but their selection seems rather strange, and if the Civil Service Commission advertised in the proper way I do not understand how only men from King's and Annapolis were appointed. In

fact, I am very doubtful if there was not some underhand work in their appointment.


Mr. DOUGLAS:: No, no.


William Duff: I can quite understand the prospective senator from the West saying "no, no." I hope he will very soon be able to say "yes, yes," in the other Chamber.
I think the minister understands that this is rather a serious business. Last year, something like $7,000 was paid in travelling expenses-not salaries-for these men to get to and from their respective home counties to other parts of Nova Scotia. That is bad business, and I think the minister should have a change made and so save a large sum of money to the taxpayers of this country. Wherever fruit is grown, in any county, that county should have an inspector, instead of all the inspectors being grouped as at present in the two counties of Annapolis and King's. I trust that the minister will look into the matter and see that this state of affairs is remedied.


John Archibald Maharg: We are not large producers of fruit in the Prairie Provinces, but we have felt the need of an inspector in connection with our purchases. >
Has the minister given that much consideration?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Inspectors who work
actively in the field during the summer are at work in the markets inspecting fruit in the winter.


John Archibald Maharg: In markets from
which the fruit is sold, or where it is delivered to the consumer?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Where is it delivered to
the consumer?


John Archibald Maharg: We have had great difficulty in the West in getting in touch with these inspectors. We have had some shipments of fruit, over which, I am sure, there was not much supervision while the packing was being done. How are these inspectors distributed throughout the West?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We have three at Winnipeg, one at Calgary, one at Saskatoon, one at Brandon, one at Edmonton, four in British Columbia.


John Archibald Maharg: I notice that the two
great consuming provinces in which there is little fruit produced have no inspectors at all. I suggest that the minister at least arrange for an inspector at each of the large centres from which the fruit is distributed.


Auguste Théophile Léger: The minister may have
named some inspectors who are working in New Brunswick, but so many of them were stated to be in Nova Scotia that I thought they were all there. I hope that he will take into consideration the needs of our province in this respect.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We have one inspector
at St. John and one at Gagetown.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Throughout the
Eastern Townships orchards have been diminishing in number during recent years. We have had some extremely severe winters which have been very hard on the trees. Would it be possible, by experiments conducted throughout the Eastern Townships, to determine what trees are best suited to the hills of that part of the country? It occurs to me that very valuable advice in this connection might be given by the Experimental Farm. The farm sent me some trees which they developed recently, some new varities which I am trying in my own orchard, and I wonder whether this plan could not be extended somewhat in order that it might be ascertained what kind of tree is best suited for that part of the country.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: If the hon. gentleman will apply to the Central Experimental Farm he will receive full information. At Lennox-ville and at Morden, Manitoba, we are carrying on experiments with a view to producing hardy fruits for those sections of the country where fruit does not thrive under ordinary conditions. We have a man scouting through Northern Canada on the lookout for hardy varieties of trees which can be crossed with softer varieties so as to produce a hard variety that will withstand the more severe weather conditions. The United States has for some time had a man in our northern country engaged in similar work.


Mr. FAFARD:: Upon examining the
Auditor General's report I find that an amount of $70 was paid to Roger Gagnon, Riviere du Loup, for " travelling expenses" Of course, we cannot grow fruit in Quebec as it is grown in British Columbia, but in some parts of my county fruit growing is quite extensively carried on. I can quits understand that in having a Minister of Agriculture from British Columbia we have to pay for a little, but I think we are at least entitled to our share in this matter.


Alexander William Chisholm: On looking over the
Auditor General's report I find the names of a number of persons working in one county

under the Destructive Insect and Pest Act. Would that come under this item?


Georges Henri Boivin: That item was passed, but if the hon. member was not here when it was discussed, perhaps he will have the unanimous consent of the committee to put a question concerning it.


Alexander William Chisholm: On page A-18 of the Auditor General's report, volume 1, I find the names of ten or twelve men who are evidently doing the same work in one county. The name of Mr. Baker is among them; he is from Middleton, Nova Scotia. I am anxious to know what these men are doing.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: These gentlemen operating under the Insect and Pest Act are engaged in investigating the ravages of various insects found to be injurious to agriculture, such as the wireworm, the cutworm, the brown-tail moth, the spruce bud worm, the army worm, parasites injurious to turnips and other roots, and all those which I described this afternoon. The hon. gentleman will find a full report of that in to-morrow's Hansard; I gave it shortly before dinner.


Alexander William Chisholm: What are the particular qualifications of these men? Has location anything to do with their appointment?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Some of them are graduates of agricultural colleges. They go into the field first as assistant or temporary inspectors, and as they work with men who are well versed in the business they become qualified to act as permanent inspectors.


Alexander William Chisholm: Do they send reports
to the department?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, reports are sent in by all these field men at regular intervals.


Alexander William Chisholm: I am anxious to know how it is that ten or twelve inspectors are appointed in one county while in other counties there are none at all. Are these insects entirely confined to the counties in which men are appointed?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: If the hon. member will
look at their expense accounts he will find, I think, that their activities are not confined to one county. These men may be selected from one county; I do not know anything about that. All I care about is whether they have the required qualifications and whether they render satisfactory service to the department. They may be

sent anywhere we wish to send them. In fact, in the engaging of all these men, the arrangement is generally made that they can be moved to any part of the country where their services may be required. In the case of a serious outbreak we could move them from British Columbia to the Maritime Provinces, and so on.


Alexander William Chisholm: Are they appointed bj the Civil Service Commission?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes.


Alexander William Chisholm: My hon. friend (Mr Duff) gave a list of names of men whc were, I think, all located in one county.


William Duff: Two counties.


Alexander William Chisholm: My surprise is that I find all these men are located in that county also, and some of them are costing this country as much as $3,700, a good deal of that being travelling expenses. It appears to me extraordinary that one county should be selected as a place from which all these officials should come, and in that they should confine their operations mainly to that county.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: What county?


Alexander William Chisholm: If my hon. friends will look up the Auditor General's report, they will find out what county it is. It is not right that the people of this country should bp paying travelling expenses in order to have these men located in one county. I would be delighted to see some of them in my county. The minister says that they are graduates of colleges. We have college graduates throughout the country. While I know the minister is desirous of doing all he can-and he is doing well-I am sure his object would be attained much more successfully if he were to scatter these men throughout the province, and I am speaking just now of Nova Scotia. In that case, I might be able to say.to my friends in Inverness county when they came up against such a proposition, that such a man was located at such a place, and they could apply to him. But if I have to tell them that they will have to go down to this county, which I will not name, it might be difficult for them to get in touch with the inspector. It would be much better if the minister would scatter these officials throughout the province, one here and another there, in counties where they can do the most effective work and where their efforts will be of most benefit to the people. It is the service to the public that will issue from their efforts that I am consid-

ering, not the accommodation of some gentlemen in a particular county. I dislike being unduly critical, but when you consider the fact that this county is selected and fifteen, twenty-five or thirty officials, who are engaged in a particular effort, are confined to one county, while their duties must be scattered throughout the province, such a condition of affairs is extraordinary.


Mr. BEST:: I understood the minister to tell us that these inspectors were selected by the Civil Service Commission, and I understand that every civil servant has to pass a certain examination. It can, therefore, be /readily seen that all these civil servants may he in one district and this is one of the faults that I have to find with the Civil Service Commission. As the two hon. gentlemen have said, it is possible for every civil servant in any particular branch to be selected from any one county in the Dominion, because the Civil Service Commission send circulars throughout the country and those who stand highest in the examination get the positions. It may be in this case, that the circulars were sent throughout the different counties, and the fruit inspectors were all appointed from those two counties. That is one of the evils that I see in the Civil Service Commission, and as the hon. member (Mr. Chisholm) states, it is not fair to the Dominion, or to the different counties, that men are appointed to different positions, not only in the Department of Agriculture, but in every other department, all in a few counties, whereas, if we had some other system, especially in the outside service, appointments would be distributed over the various counties. I can readily understand that the minister has no power or control whatever to see that these people are appointed in different counties, because they are appointed by the Civil Service Commission under an examination system, and they may all happen to be from one county. I hope this evil will be remedied in the near future.


William Duff: I cannot agree with my
hon. friend (Mr. Best) that the minister has no responsibility or control in the matter. If the minister requires twelve inspectors for this particular branch of his department for the destruction of insects and pests of all kinds, it is his duty, or that of the deputy, when he sends word down to the Civil Service Commission, that he requires twelve inspectors, to say that he requires them for certain counties.


John Best: Would he not be breaking
the rules imposed upon to the Civil Service Commission if he did that? I understand the Civil Service Commission claim that he would.


William Duff: I do not think he would be
breaking any rule. If the Department of Agriculture requires twelve inspectors, it is the duty of someone in the department, when the request is sent to the Civil Service Commission for the appointment of these men, to say that they are to be located in certain counties, and not to leave the matter wide open so that the Civil Service Commission, when they send out the notices and receive the applications, will, for instance, appoint twelve men in Victoria county, which is the most northerly county in Nova Scotia, when their work will be principally in Yarmouth, Queen's and Shelburne, and Digby. That is a stupid way of making appointments. Some responsibility must attach to the Department of Agriculture, and if it has failed to instruct the Civil Service Commission that these men are to be in different counties, the department has failed in its duty to the public. I have no complaint as regards where these men live; my complaint is that the people of this country are paying seven or eight thousand dollars in travelling expenses for these men, when that money could be saved. I have no complaint because they live in one county and have more knowledge and consequently receive the appointments; I am proud this county is able to produce this number of inspectors; but after receiving the appointments, they should be sent into the different counties of the province to do this work, thereby saving this large sum of money in travelling expenses.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: It is really an advantage to have these inspectors located in those particular counties in which the bulk of their work is to be carried on, because when an inspector lives at home, he costs us nothing for hotel expenses. While I am very glad indeed that the hon. gentleman has brought this to my attention, I might point out that under the Civil Service Act the minister cannot name any particular man he wants appointed.


William Duff: I did not suggest that the minister should name the man, but that he should designate the county for which he wants him appointed.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The Civil Service competitive examinations are open to the whole

country and the men are appointed, I understand, according to their standing in the examination. However, I will bear in mind what the hon. gentleman and other hon. members who have spoken along the same line have said, and see if we cannot break up some of these groups.


James Alexander Robb: What the minister says
about appointments is probably true, but surely the Department of Agriculture has authority to dictate where the inspector, whoever may be appointed, shall reside, thereby saving a certain amount of money that might be more profitably used than in the travelling on the railways.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The bulk of the fruit
work is in only two counties.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: It seems to me there is too much travelling done in the province of Nova Scotia by these officers, and that there are far too many inspectors appointed. There are twelve or fourteen of them, and there are only eighteen counties in the province. I understood the minister to say that these men are all located in one county. That does not strike me as business, herding them all in one county. There cannot be work for them all there.


Mr. DAVIDSON:: Does the hon. gentleman refer to apple inspectors or to what officers?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am told they are inspectors who go around seeing if there are any pests. I do not know whether my hon. .friend from Digby and Annapolis (Mr. Davidson) feels the pest coming up his spine or not, but from the fact that he is coming to his feet one would think it is coming home to him. Perhaps he has particular knowledge of who these men are, and where the flies are that they are chasing all the time. My point is that if there is work to be done all over the province, these twelve or fourteen inspectors should not all be located in one county, but in different parts of the province at a convenient distance from their work. In that way they could be consulted more readily, and it would save the expense of travelling from one end of the province to the other. I can readily understand that the minister cannot provide against who shall be appointed, if the appointment is based upon a competitive examination open to the whole Dominion, but he certainly should be able to say where these officers shall be located, so as to give the best service to the country and to avoid unnecessary expense.


Avard Longley Davidson: I think there is an entire misapprehension in the minds of hon. gentlemen in reference to this matter. I think all will agree that if the Civil Service Commission are going to appoint apple inspectors it is only natural that they should go to a county where they would find expert apple growers, men who knew the business. It is also not unnatural to suppose that these people should reside where the work is to be done. Now, as a matter of fact, as hon. gentlemen on the other side who have spoken and who come from Nova Scotia know very well, there are practically only three fruit counties in Nova Scotia. They are Hants, King's and, most important of all, the county of Annapolis. These constitute practically the fruit belt of the province. There are a few crab apples grown in the county of Lunenburg, but as a matter of fact, probably 95 per cent of the apples grown in Nova Scotia are grown in the three counties I have mentioned. The fruit inspectors are divided pretty nearly equally between those counties. There are fewer in the county of Hants, because fewer apples are grown there. There are more in the counties of King's and Annapolis, because they are the two largest fruit growing counties. My hon. friend from Inverness apparently resented the idea that these men were not located in his own county.


Alexander William Chisholm: I had no reference at all to inspectors, but was referring to men who were working under the Destructive Insect Pest Act.


Avard Longley Davidson: The duties of these men are largely to suggest means of combatting the pests which visit the fruit belt; that is their primary duty. Now it would be very absurd to send an inspector for brown tail moth, caterpillar, or something of that kind, away up into the desolate wastes of Inverness county where there are nothing but rocks and that kind of thing, for there would be nothing there for him to do. Consequently, it is only natural to find that those gentlemen whose duty it is to safeguard the fruit industry, and to prevent the ravages of insects, should be located and do their work in the fruit districts.
I want to say just a word in regard to the matter brought up by my hon. friend from Brome (Mr. McMaster). He suggested that the Department of Agriculture might discover some hardy variety of apple that would grow in his constituency and not be killed by the severe frosts which visit that locality. The minister intimated

that the department were endeavouring to make some investigation along that line, and I dare say the department are getting some good results, but I want to point out to my hon. friend from Brome a fact which he as a free trader will very well appreciate, and that is that it is better to allow a county that is adapted to growing apples to grow apples, and to allow a county that is adapted to growing maple sugar to grow maple sugar. If my hon. friend wants shade for his farmers in Brome, and wants trees which will not be killed by the frost, I believe it would be better if he gave up altogether the idea of growing apples and stuck to maple sugar instead. Maples would afford quite as good shade as apple trees, and would be better suited to the climate in that locality.


William Duff: In the course of my remarks I distinctly stated that the counties of King's, Annapolis and Hants were the principal fruit growing counties in Nova Scotia. You will notice, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member for Digby and Annapolis said that the only apples that grew in Lunenburg county were crab apples. That certainly was a very statesmanlike remark; it could fall only from the lips of a statesman. We all remember how the hon. member for Digby and Annapolis took an oath that he was a statesman. I am not in that class, and consequently I am not going to say that the only fruit they grow in his country is crab apples. My point is this: If, as the hon. gentleman says, the counties of Annapolis and King's are the principal fruit growing counties of the province, most of the work done by these twelve men would be done in those two counties. Therefore, why is there such a large amount charged in the Auditor General's Report for travelling expenses? My objection was not that these men were from Annapolis and King's, but that this country was spending $7,000 or $8,000 in travelling expenses, and that money must have been expended in travelling between Annapolis, Lunenburg, Yarmouth, King's, Shelburne, Colchester and Cumberland counties, and perhaps as far down as Inverness, Cape Breton and Victoria. I say that in the interests of the country the amount so spent in travelling expenses should be saved, and that instead of these men being located in King's and Annapolis counties, they should be located in different parts of the province.


Avard Longley Davidson: I did not for a moment wish to make any disparaging remarks about the county which is represented by my hon. friend from Lunenburg. As a matter of fact, he represents a very fine county, a much better county than you would naturally think, and I do not mean to say that the only fruit grown there is the crab-apple.


William Duff: That is what you said.


Avard Longley Davidson: They do grow chokecherries there, and the county is a very prosperous one, but I think my hon. friend will admit that it is not a great apple-growing county. The agriculturists in Lunenburg county, while excellent in other directions, are not particularly proficient in the art of horticulture, and in view of that fact, one would not naturally expect to find very many efficient apple inspectors in that locality. As a fact, nearly all the work of these inspectors, especially of apple inspectors, is done, so far as I know, in the three counties I have mentioned, and in the city of Halifax, which is the shipping port. An inspector is kept there and must be paid travelling expenses, and he is allowed a per diem charge while on duty in that port. My hon. friend will discover, I think, if he takes the trouble to investigate, that very little of this money, the expenditure of which grieves him so much, is really spent in his county. There is not much occasion for these officers to do work in that particular locality, and I do not see that the hon. gentleman has any great reason to complain [DOT]of extravagance on the part of the Government in this connection. Now, he referred to the fact that I had taken an oath on one occasion that I was a statesman. Well, let me say that I have never heard that statement contradicted in Canada.


William Duff: Mr. Chairman, we do not
need to argue about the knowledge which the hon. member for Digby and Annapolis has regarding my county, or any other county than his own. We have only to use our eyes to size up the situation in a few moments. I am not contending that my county is the biggest apple growing locality in the province from which I come, but the hon. member displays his absolute ignorance of matters of fact when he says that we do not grow many apples in Lunenburg.
Let me say that the fruit grown
9 p.m. in that county is second to none in Canada. Besides, we export thousands of barrels to London, England.


Georges Parent: Is there any arrangement between the Federal and the Provincial Governments with regard to inspection?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There is not.


Georges Parent: I am sorry there is not. In our part of the country, and also in Kamouraska, a famous plum was produced a few years ago, hut for certain reasons which I do not know, its culture has been discontinued. At any rate, it is no longer marketed. Has the minister taken any steps to see that this particular fruit is again cultivated and put upon the market?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We had in that district
an expert who was familiar with the conditions there, but, unfortunately, he was killed in the war, and so far we have not been able to secure a first class man to take his place. As soon as one is available, however, we shall see that he is assigned to that district.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health of Animals, administration of the Animal Contagious Diseases and Meat and Canned Foods Acts, $1,410,000.
Andrew Ross McMaster: What indemnities are paid to farmers whose herds, wholly or in part, are destroyed because of disease? I understand there is a difference in treatment between accredited herds and ordinary herds. Perhaps the minister will shorten the discussion on this item by succinctly telling us what the operation of the Act is in this respect? >


Simon Fraser Tolmie: As regards compensation paid for animals, it is immaterial whether a herd is accredited or not, except in the case of tuberculosis. We pay compensation for animals destroyed under the accredited herd system and also under the municipal system. In computing the compensation for grade cattle, we pay two-thirds of a maximum valuation of $80, or $53.33, assuming the maximum is paid. For pure bred animals the maximum valuation is $250, and compensation on the two-thirds basis would represent $166.66. In either case the inspector exercises care to ascertain the actual market value of the animal at the time of slaughter.


Georges Parent: How much has been paid for cattle slaughtered throughout the country under this item?


John Frederick Johnston: May I ask, before the minister answers this question, whether the compensation is paid in respect of all breeds?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, it is applicable to
all breeds. Last year we paid $21,827.94 for accredited herds.


Georges Parent: Where?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Throughout the whole
Dominion.


John Ewen Sinclair: For how many animals?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Two hundred and twelve.


John Ewen Sinclair: What disposition is made of the debris?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That goes to the owner; hut where the carcase is found to be unfit for food, it is destroyed. Now, while these figures are large, I may point out that the accredited herd system covers only pure bred herds of cattle. In such herds where there are a few grade animals, it is necessary, of course, to eliminate them so as to make the herd perfectly clean. That is why we handle grade animals in these herds. Under ordinary conditions the system deals with pure bred herds altogether.


Mr. JACOBS:: I do not want to pose as an expert in matters of this kind, for the reason that the shoe-maker should stick to his last. However, I have a recollection that the minister told us a few days ago, when discussing the question of the British embargo, that we have not had a serious case of contagious disease among our animals for nearly two generations. Now, it seems to me that $1,410,000 for a department which I gathered at the time, of the minister's speech, was really not functioning at all because there was no necessity for it, is a rather large sum, more particularly as we are increasing it this year by $390,000. This is very much like Mark Twain's patent medicine advertisement which stated: "One bottle cured me, please send another dozen."


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There is no country in the world that I am aware of where the herds are absolutely free from tuberculosis. What I said the other day in discussing the embargo was that we had not had pleuro-pneumonia in this country for thirty-four years, and that that particular outbreak-the last one we had on this side-was found in a shipment of cattle from Europe. The disease was discovered in quarantine, and the animals were destroyed and the premises disinfected. I said further that we had not had foot and mouth disease for thirty-six years, and that particular outbreak also was found in quarantine. I drew attention to the fact, too, that the Health of Animals Branch was able to protect the boundary line of some four thousand miles between this country and the United States when the highly infectious foot and mouth disease occurred

there on three or four different occasions, and when that country lost millions of dollars in consequence. That is what I said. I notice that some hon. members, in referring to what I had stated, went so far as to assert that I suggested that the country was absolutely free from disease. I did not make that statement, and I do not want such an impression to get abroad, because it would be ridiculous to any veterinarian familiar with conditions throughout the world. Now, while we have some attacks of tuberculosis in this country we are no worse off than other countries, and Great Britain could not possibly keep our cattle out on that account, for it is a well-known fact that some British herds are also affected with tuberculosis. We have been doing a very large business in pure bred cattle with the United States. The United States took up what is known as the accredited herd system and it was adopted in this country on the 20th September, 1919, having been followed since. This was adopted in this country on 20th September 1919, and we have been following it up since. I think it will be proper for me to give the hon. members a brief account of what the accredited herd system is. We accept only pure bred herds of cattle. We test them with tuberculin under certain conditions, destroying those animals which are infected, or isolating them under what is known as the Bang system, thoroughly disinfecting the premises. After the cattle have passed three tests within twelve months, or two tests a year apart, without finding any disease on the premises, the owner is given a certificate that he possesses what is known as an accredited herd. That herd must be taken under the supervision of the Health of Animals Branch. The owner must not allow any other animals on the premises without being tested to the satisfaction of the Veterinary Director General, and there are certain other stringent rules under which he must maintain this herd. When he has done that the United States government will accept his herd, provided it has been tested within twelve months, without any question whatever and there be no testing at the boundary line. We have arranged with the United States government to accept their cattle under similar conditions.
I feel that it would be an immense undertaking to attempt to clean-up tuberculosis in a country-wide way. In the first place we have not the efficient help that would be necessary, and it would be useless to tackle it in a country as big as this
is without the approval of the farmers and livestock men in general. So that through the medium of this accredited herd system we will be cleaning up certain herds throughout the country, and in that way educating the farmers as to the value of keep disease-free herds. Out in the province of British Columbia-a province that has perhaps made greater progress than any other in Canada in cleaning up tuberculosis-I may say that when the tuberculin test was first introduced amongst dairy herds we met with a good deal of opposition; but after a while certain herdsmen began to clean up their herds and the dairy districts began to get free from tuberculosis. In a very short time we found that the cities were beginning not to accept milk except from herds that were free from tuberculosis, and the result is that whole districts are now free from this disease, and the farmers have experienced a very direct benefit from the cleaning up of their'herds. We hope to educate the farmers throughout the country by beginning first with the accredited herd system. Afterwards, from time to time, as seems practicable, further steps may be taken along these lines. In handling these cattle of the accredited herds the Veterinary Director General must be advised very fully of any movement of these cattle-the sale of cattle from these farms or the purchase of cattle for stocking them-breeders are obliged to work under very strict rules, and careful sanitary measures must be observed on the farm. Failure to comply with these regulations will result in the cancellation of their accreditation.
In regard to the increase in our appropriation for which we are asking at the present time, I may say that this is largely due to the popularity of this particular movement. It has become popular much faster than we had anticipated. The people of the country have taken it up, or rather the pure bred stock breeders, in a wholehearted way and the result is that more money will be required next year than is needed at the present time. To give you an idea of the extent of our operations I may say that we now have about 463 applications and 150 of these are on the waiting list, it being very difficult indeed to secure a sufficient number of expert veterinarians to carry on this work. We are now using what is known as the triple test wherever possible. In the first place they used what is known as the subcutaneous test under which we took an animal's temperature for several hours and then injected tuberculin, and followed this



up the next day by taking the temperature of the animal every three hours. As a result of this we came to a conclusion as to whether there was a sufficient rise of temperature or not. Whenever the animal's temperature showed no rise we considered that animal a healthy animal; and in other cases where the temperature went up three degrees we considered the animal was affected with tuberculosis. There have been a number of improvements lately and we are now using what is known as the intra-dermal test in which we inject only about three drops of tuberculin into the layers of the skin, and we form our diagnosis by the swelling or enlargement at the point infected. We also have what is known as the ophthalmic test in which a little plaque containing tuberculin is placed in the eye and, as a result, in the diseased animal there ensues an inflamed eye with a certain amount of discharge a few hours afterwards. It is very important to have these tests for the reason that some unscrupulous breeders are attempting to frustrate them by saturating their animals with tuberculin; but the triple test has greatly increased the difficulties in the way carrying out any such fraudulent trick as that. The facts which I have narrated account very largely for the increase in our appropriation. This is a very valuable work indeed. To give you an idea of how popular it is in the United States, I may state that they now have over there 5,000 herds fully accredited at the present time, and 27,842 herds under test. They are very much behind in their work however, for the same reason that we have experienced-they find it is very difficult to obtain a sufficient number of properly qualified men for these duties.
Then again during the past year we had a number of outbreaks of hog cholera which has made it necessary to pay rather more compensation than is customary. The handling of the enormous number of cattle in the mange area in the West was a work of extreme difficulty. They number some 220,000 and the whole of these were dipped twice in a bath of hot sulphur and lime at a temperature of 120 degrees. All this work was done within a few weeks. It was necessary to have a large number of inspectors for this work and in addition we secured the co-operation of many cowboys who ranged over an area of some 2,600 miles in order to see that a clean drive was made and that no animal was left behind. This year has been a very busy one indeed in connection with the health of animals work. We expect the coming

year will be one in which there will be a great deal more work to do along the lines I have indicated.


Georges Parent: The minister has made
a very admirable statement and we are very greatly indebted to him for it. He has mentioned that out of a vote of $1,410,000 about $20,000 have been spent in connection with the slaughtering of cattle. Will he be good enough to tell us what breeds of cattle these were?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I have not the information as to the breeds of cattle. It would require a return to bring down all the information for which the hon. member asks.


Georges Parent: The $20,000 must have
been spent very quickly.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: If the hon. gentleman is
anxious to get the information I shall be very pleased to get it for him.


Georges Parent: I should like very much
to get it.


Auguste Théophile Léger: In the province of New
Brunswick we have good farmers and good stock raisers and any information we can get upon topics of interest to them will be welcome. I would like to ask the minister whether there is more than one veterinary surgeon employed in the province of New Brunswick and, if so what their names are. I would also like to know who is the inspector of meat and canned foods for that province?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: While the deputy is
looking up that information I would like to state the effectiveness of the work of the Health of Animals Branch. Previous to 1914 the disease known as dourine prevailed among range horses in Western Canada causing serious losses. The compensation paid in the year was no less than $48,000 for that one disease. We had a very efficient staff handling that work, including our present chief pathologist, Dr. Watson. That officer was able to discover a method of testing the blood of these animals thus rendering the diagnosis very easy. The following figures show the excellent results of the work done. In 1914, $48,000 was paid in compensation; 1915, $32,000; 1916, $17,000; 1917, $3,000; 1918, $1,340; 1919, $261; 1920, $70; and in 1921 nothing.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Before the minister
leaves this item I would like him to state what the difference is between tuberculosis and pleuro-pneumonia in cattle?

Would an animal affected with tuberculosis be rejected as a food product, and also would an animal affected with pleuropneumonia be rejected as a food product? And what is the difference, if any, between the two diseases?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We may have tuberculosis in a number of stages. An animal might be affected with tuberculosis without any external symptoms whatever. In fact, I have seen cattle shown at our exhibitions that were beef fat and yet they were fairly putrid with tuberculosis. The chronic form might be found located in any part of the body, usually in the lymphatic glands, very often in the lungs, and sometimes in the intestines and in the liver and other organs; in fact, it might appear anywhere in the skin. In contagious pleuropneumonia you have the pleura and the lungs affected principally and the animal lives only a short time. In pleuro-pneumonia cases the carcases would be entirely destroyed. In tuberculosis all animals pass through our public abattoirs under inspection, and where the disease is generalized, that is, where it has reached a stage to indicate that the whole system may be affected, the animals are destroyed; but where only a few small organs are affected in a slight way, or the disease is incap-sulated, those affected parts are destroyed and the carcase is passed as fit for food. That is done in all abattoirs in every country and is considered a perfectly safe practice.
In reply to the hon. member who enquired regarding employees in New Brunswick, I may say that we have the following veterinary inspectors:	D. McCuaig,
McAdam Junction; T. A. Ratte, Edmunds-ton; J. H. Shonyo, St. John; and one car inspector, Howlett, St. John. There are no meat inspectors there. The meat inspection system of the Health of Animals branch is carried on only in those abattoirs that slaughter for export or interprovincial trade. It is true that a good deal of the meat slaughtered under those conditions is used locally. But we do not maintain any inspection of slaughter houses which kill for local business only. That inspection is supposed to be within the purview of the municipalities and the provincial governments.


Donald Sutherland: In reference to the inspection of animals slaughtered for export and interprovincial trade, it has always appeared to me to be a very peculiar state of affairs that we exercise
67i
such extreme caution in those cases and throw very little safeguards around the food that is consumed by our own people. It is true, as the minister has just said, that is left to the municipal authorities, but we all know that they do little or nothing in that respect, and surely if any people are deserving of these safeguards it is the people right in our own country. With reference to the accredited herds, it seems rather remarkable to me that only 212 head of cattle have been slaughtered under this system for which compensation has been paid.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That was for last year.


Donald Sutherland: Well, I know of
one herd where over 80 head were slaughtered, and I know of other herds where various animals were slaughtered and in all those cases compensation has not yet been paid. I think the excuse given was that the department did not have funds to meet those particular claims. Is it not a fact that where many animals have been found to be suffering from tubercular trouble they have not been slaughtered, but have been disposed of in order to clear the disease out of the particular herd? I understand it is a common practice for dealers to purchase diseased animals from such herds and ship them into some other part of the province for sale by auction. Has the minister any information as to this practice?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: When a person applies
to come under the accredited herds system he hands his herd over entirely to the Veterinary Director General and his Health of Animals branch, and any animals condemned for slaughter, if not generalized, are shipped to an abattoir where they are slaughtered strictly under inspection of the Health of Animals branch. We do not permit a man to 'remove his animals from the premises and send them to another place to be auctioned off. While I am on this particular item I may say that the hon. member for Frontenac the other night in referring to a case where the Health of Animals branch had destroyed some animals for glanders, stated:
As it was, the farmers could not prepare their ground for the next year's crop; they could not even get out their potatoes or anything of that kind, and on the whole they were left in a very bad position as regards their crop for this year.
On making inquiry at the Health of Animals branch I find there were twenty-seven horses quarantined in the outbreak referred to divided among twelve owners.

Of five horses destroyed, three belonged to one owner, and of these one was a colt and could not he worked. This particular owner bought two new horses, giving him the same number of work horses that he had before. The other two horses belonged to two different owners. So that they suffered inconvenience to that extent while these changes were being made; and these men lost two horses.
Then, again, the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) criticized the Health'of Animals Branch on account of their action in connection with an outbreak of hog cholera on the farm of one Alderson. He stated that Alderson said that his hogs were not infected with hog cholera and were free from disease. I am quite sure that the hon. gentleman was not fully informed or he would not have made the statement. In the first place, the ordinary garbage inspector who was sent down to inspect these hogs-this being a garbage feeding plant-had no difficulty whatever in diagnosing the disease among those hogs as hog cholera. He immediately advised the Health of Animals Branch inspectors; a careful inspection was made, and they had no difficulty in confirming the lay inspector's diagnosis. I may say that we permit the feeding of garbage to hogs only under license, for the reason that a great deal of this garbage-fed pork, particularly if imported, may communicate hog cholera. Unless pork is thoroughly cooked it may produce hog cholera if it comes from a hog which has had cholera or a hog which has had the double immunization treatment which is given in the United States. On these premises the inspectors found garbage that was not cooked, and any one breaking that rule forfeits the right to compensation. The son of the proprietor, who was on the premises at the time, admitted after some conversation with the inspectors that some hogs had already died. Under the rules he should have at once reported that to the Veterinary Inspector-General's Branch. I am sure that the hon. member for South Oxford and the hon. member for Frontenac would not have made the statement they did had they had the full information. It is only fair to our inspectors that this explanation should be made; for I am sure they are trying to do their best to keep our animals free from contagious disease.


Donald Sutherland: With reference to the last remark of the hon. minister, I think I made it quite clear the other night when I referred to it that the man who had suffered the loss stated most emphatically, 
and his son made an affidavit that no disease existed on his premises, that no hogs were sick and none had died. Since making- that statement I have received a report from the head of the Health of Animals Branch with regard to this matter which has given me some information that I did not have at that time, but which, I believe, emphasizes the justice of the claim made by the person whose two hundred and twelve hogs were destroyed by the1 inspector. It is true that the business he was carrying on was located near Toronto; it was what Was known as the old Humber piggery, erected by the Government of Ontario many years ago, and he has been carrying it on for quite a number of years. He has been breeding hogs as well as buying them. He claims that when the inspector came there he had in a separate pen some of the culls from the different litters. It is well known to any stock breeder that there are often some unthrifty pigs in a litter and that it is good business to separate them from the larger and more thrifty ones; so this man had a few unthrifty ones in a separate pen. The inspector looked at them and said: "Why, there must be something the matter with these pigs." He took their temperatures; he killed one of them and asserted that the pigs were diseased; that there was cholera among them and that they would all have to be destroyed.
The minister has stated to-night that this man's son admitted that a number of the pigs had died. Well, my information from the proprietor and his son is that they did not make any such admission; that they had not lost a pig in two years except some small pigs which had died while they were with the brood sows. Now, the one who should know whether or not there was disease among the animals would surely be the man who owned them. As to cooking the garbage, he has a complete outfit for that purpose. Before he could get a license from the Government he had to waive all claims for damages unless he could prove that the disease had been brought in from some outside source, so he would be careful to see that the garbage was well cooked. I understand that there is no piggery in the country that has been kept better or in a cleaner condition than this one, and the minister will find that his inspectors reported to that effect on previous occasions. When the inspector took the temperature of a number of these pigs and informed the proprietor that they were to be slaughtered, the proprietor asked the privilege of taking some of them

after they were slaughtered and dressing the carcasses because they were almost fit for market. A number of them were picked out that did not have any symptoms of disease. As a matter of fact this man stood outside the pen while the animals were driven out of twelve different pens and selected as they came out some of those that were fit for market-that is, that were fleshy enough and would meet the demands of the market. Thirty-three of these animals were dressed by the proprietor; the intestines were left alongside where the inspector could examine them, which he did-and not one animal of the thirty-three was found diseased.
It may be said that hog cholera will remain dormant. My experience has not been very great but I know of an instance that occurred a few years ago where inspectors went into a certain district, destroyed all the hogs in a certain locality and placed a valuation on them which was the most absurd that could be imagined- one would almost think that the men had never seen a hog before, judging from the valuation they placed upon these animals. The result was the appointment of an independent commissioner to take evidence in the matter and to place a value on the animals, and the matter was satisfactorily adjusted. The minister tells us that these men are above reproach; that they are the best men that can be found in Canada or in the world. We have heard that statement very often in reply to criticisms that have been levelled against men who are in the Department of Agriculture. Well, these men are like a good many others who go into the Civil Service, who have a soft job as long as they live and do not get too busy or pay too much attention to their work. That has been my experience, at least. In this case the person aggrieved makes the request that an independent commission of practical men take evidence in regard to the matter, and he is prepared to abide by the result. But he objects strenuously to being practically ruined by the act of some inspector. When animals of that kind were selling at the high price prevailing in April of last year, it is a serious matter to have 212 hogs slaughtered by an inspector under those conditions, particularly in view of the fact that the man, his son and his manager are prepared to substantiate every statement that they have made; that there was no disease in their herd; that not an animal died from disease, and that the food was cooked propel ly because they have all the appliances for
cooking it. There is a straight denial by the owner, his son and his manager of the statement of the inspector in this department, which we are told is composed of men who are the best to be found in any country. In any case, the action was a pretty high-handed one. These 33 hogs, which were not picked out because they did not show any signs of disease, but which were picked out by the proprietor who stood outside and selected them as they were driven out of different pens, did not show any signs of disease after they had been slaughtered, and they were all disposed of by him. The rest of the animals were destroyed. The proprietor claims that there was no disease; the minister's official claims that there was disease and that the man is not entitled to any compensation.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: To whom were the 33 animals disposed of and by whom?


Donald Sutherland: By the owner of the animals to either some packing house or dealers in Toronto.


Charles Murphy: With the consent of the inspector?


Donald Sutherland: Yes.


John Patrick Molloy: Were those animals
condemned by a lawful veterinary surgeon, an inspector under the Health of Animals Branch?


Donald Sutherland: I am not sure whether he was a qualified veterinary surgeon. He was an inspector under the Health of Animals Branch. I could not say what his qualifications were, but from the information I have received, I do not think they were very good. It is impossible for a man to do business except under a heavy fine unless he has a license from the department, and when he gets a license he has to sign a statement to this effect:
In consideration of the granting of a license to me, I hereby agree to maintain my hogs in a clean, sanitary condition, to sell no hogs except for immediate slaughter, to notify the veterinary inspector if sickness appears among my hogs, to forfeit all claim for compensation in case it is necessary to destroy any of my hogs as a result of hog cholera unless it can be shown that the infection came from some other source than from feeding garbage.
He has to show that the disease had entered his herd from some other source than the feeding of garbage. In this particular case, the man claims that there was no disease; that his hogs were perfectly sound and healthy except for a few culls from litters that were put in a pen by

themselves on account of their unthrifty condition. That is rather a remarkable document to compel a man to sign before he is granted a license. These regulations, to which I have referred to-night, are not embodied in the Act for compensation for the slaughter of animals when diseased; they are made by virtue of power given to the department to make regulations. I am not objecting to that power remaining in the hands of the minister and his department if it is not abused; but I am satisfied by past experience that some of these men are not competent or safe men to be travelling around this country inspecting herds and doing the things they have done. I remember where one of these inspectors came to half a dozen farmers in my riding and in a sneering way went around, shot their hogs on their farms wherever they were to be found, and left without giving them any satisfaction. Eventually other inspectors and a commissioner had to be sent there in order to have the matter adjusted, and by the exercise of a little common sense the matter was satisfactorily adjusted. In view of the seriousness of the results, under conditions such as this to which I have referred, we ought to be very careful before we place unlimited power in the hands of any of these inspectors to go around the country in a high-handed manner and to do the things which have been done.
Before we pass this item, I should like to have some assurance from the minister that a further inquiry will be made into this matter, and that it will not be cut oif by a statement of one or two of his inspectors:
I have not the slightest doubt that, had the minister himself or the head of the Health of Animals Branch had some personal knowledge of conditions in that case, the matter would have been much more satisfactory, and I understand that they are placed in a somewhat awkward position by reason of some officials in that branch who have not been showing as good judgment as they might have done. If, as we are led to believe from statements of those inspectors, hog cholera was prevalent in that herd, then I contend that they are absolutely unfitted for the position which they hold if they permitted thirty-three animals to be slaughtered and placed on the market in this country. If hog cholera was through this herd of hogs to the extent to which we are led to believe it was, those animals should all have been condemned and destroyed instead of being placed on the market as food. It what better way could the disease have been spread broadcast, if this

disease is as dangerous and deadly as we believe it is.
When hog cholera enters a herd, there is no doubt in the mind of the owner or anyone else in the course of a very few days whether the disease is there or not. The matter is not open for argument or dispute at all, because the animals' lives will be very short; they will be turning up their feet in short order. I am sorry I have had to speak so strongly as I have in this matter. The other night, I referred to the fact that I had the temerity to write to the head of the branch in reference to this case a few months ago at the request of the owner who was born in the county of Oxford, who has lived there, whom I have known practically all his life, and who is a man of good standing. His son is a most exceptional young man, a man whose word I would consider to be beyond reproach, and who lived in the town of Ingersoll until a few years ago. If the owner, his son and the general manager are prepared to make the statements that they claim they are willing to make-and I believe the son has already made an affidavit to that effect- then a further inquiry should be made into this matter and the question cleared up, for the satisfaction, not only of the department, but of the people in general. I am satisfied that if that is done, it will be found that some of these inspectors have not shown as good judgment as we would like them to show.


John Patrick Molloy: I should like to say a
word on this question of the competency or incompetency of inspectors generally. I think it was in the fall of 1905 that I happened to be appointed to that position myself in the province of Manitoba under the former government. Hon. Mr. Fisher was Minister of Agriculture at that time, and Dr. Rutherford was Veterinary Director General. The disease we had to deal with at that time was glanders entirely. The province of Manitoba and the whole of Western Canada was over-run with glanders, as can readily be proven by the records. That the chief inspector, myself and one or two others who were employed on this work at that time encountered great opposition is true. I remember very well in 1906 going to the town of Rathwell, to the barn of a livery man of the town, who was also a large farmer in the immediate district. It would be about the 1st of August; I am speaking from memory, but that was the date approximately. The number of horses I tested would be about 15, and if my memory serves me right, all

but one reacted. The owner of these horses and his'neighbours in the town appealed to me to let him have the use of the horses until he cut his crop. I went out and viewed the crop, and it was a splendid one.
I was not the chief inspector, but was working under Dr. C. D. MeGilvray, who is now principal of the Ontario Veterinary College. I wish to say for Dr. MeGilvray, that there is no abler man in the veterinary profession in this country to-day; there are others just as able, but none abler. I tried to communicate with him, but I could not get in touch with him either by telephone or telegraph. The only thing left for me to do was to wire to Ottawa. My telegram was answered by Dr. Hilton, and by the way, in answer to a question the other night I was informed that the Chief Veterinary Inspector was Dr. Hilton. I am well satisfied that he is. The office was new to me, and that is the reason I made the inquiry. He told me to use my own judgment. The day following the test of these fourteen or fifteen horses I went to Indian Ford, about six miles away, and there I condemned at least six or seven horses out of ten or twelve that I tested. The owner happened to be a widow, and she appealed to me because the news had been carried from Rathwell to Indian Ford as to what I might do there. In the meantime I had not received the telegram I have mentioned. The next night I went back, and I received the telegram telling me to use my own best judgment.
Foolishly for myself, I consented to leave these horses in the possession of the owners. They cut their crop, a matter of about a month or five weeks, and got it out of the way. The Veterinary Director General of that day demanded that the horses be destroyed on my report. I was busy in other parts of the province, and Dr. MeGilvray was sent out to destroy these animals. The stage was all set. The owner of the horses in Rathwell had three veterinarians on hand from the district immediately adjacent to the town, and they were prepared to put up a fight. They said: "There are no symptoms of these horses being glandered." In the meantime let me add that I first demanded that the livery horses and those that were clinical be taken out to be destroyed, and I did destroy three or four of them. These other horses had no outward symptoms of glanders. The only thing that was against them was my report, made after a very careful examination-I never make any other kind-and I had condemned them as being glandered.
Well, Dr. MeGilvray, who was chief in Manitoba, went out to handle this case. They had these three veterinarians on hand prepared to fight. There were no symptoms that a layman could see that these horses were glandered, but the symptoms in a clinical case are very simple and easily understood by the owner or by a passerby. Being somewhat of a diplomat, Dr. MeGilvray said to the owner "I will do this. Pick out your best horse"-if I remember, there were eleven-"put on as a valuation, whatever you and your confreres here may think fit, and if that horse is not glandered I pledge myself, and my position, that the Government will pay you the price of that horse, and no other horse will be destroyed unless this one is proven to be glandered. Those that are destroyed will be paid for." The owner said "Very well." The horse was destroyed by Dr. MeGilvray and he and the other three veterinarians made a post-mortem examination. They took a section of the lung of that horse, sent it to Dr. Bell, the city bacteriologist of Winnipeg, and awaited his report. In the meantime the people in the neighbourhood were saying that the Government would pay for this man's horse. I am sorry I have not the owner's name, but I did not know this matter was coming up to-night. What happened? Dr. Bell of Winnipeg made a thorough examination, microscopic and otherwise, and his report was this-"The best specimen of a glandered lung that I have ever examined."
The result was that the owner willingly consented to the destruction of the other ten and received his compensation, and I allowed him fair compensation. When I gave him that compensation sanctioned by the Parliament of this country, I gave him more than the government of any other country in the world was paying for a diseased animal, particularly a glandered animal. Canada at that time was paying more for diseased stock than any other country in the world, and since that time the compensation has been increased. We can well afford to increase the compensation, because the disease has largely disappeared from Canada.
I stand by the Health of Animals Branch of this Government, and of the previous Government, until some stronger evidence is laid before the House than was given by my hon. friend from South Oxford tonight. I say that these men are qualified, and I stand by the Minister of Agriculture, I stand by the Veterinary Director General and by his assistants until my hon.

friend or anyone else can satisfy me or prove to the majority in this House that the people's money is being paid to inspectors who do not know their duty.
In the Indian Ford case, which I dealt with myself, Dr. Rutherford said: "I have your report. Go out and re-test these animals, and if they re-act destroy them." What did I find when I arrived? I found there the local veterinarian from the town of Holland ready to find fault with anybody and everybody because he did not happen to do the work. I re-tested those animals in this man's presence. He came there to work his game of bluff, but everybody does not succeed in working that on me; at least he did not. I took out these animals and destroyed them, and in doing that, I did that family a great favour. I want	to	warn the Minister	of Agriculture,	if	warning is needed,	and	theVeterinary Director General, to advise their inspectors to be careful in exercising	any leniency in	a	caseof glanders or any other disease. Within six miles of my home in the year 1906-this	was in November	and	the
others were in August-I also granted the use of three horses to a man to do his fall ploughing, and that man gave me more trouble than the Tory party ever did. I went out of my way and risked my reputation as a veterinary inspector to give him a chance to do his fall ploughing, and what did he do? He promised faithfully that when he finished his work he would consent to the destruction of the animals. Did he do it? Well, I guess he did not. He called for a veterinarian from the town of Emerson, and in the meantime he defied me to go to his place. It was a waste of his time to tell me that. When I arrived there, however, I found that the other man was already on the scene. The test was made and the animals reacted. I destroyed them and through the laws passed by a former Government I paid him more for diseased animals than the law in any other country would allow. I paid him the compensation allowed for animals not worth 5 cents. In 1906, in Manitoba, two human beings, two young men, died as a result of contagion from contact with glandered animals. I am not acquainted with my hon. friend's case. Perhaps he is right; I am not prepared to contradict him. He is not a young man, and he is not a fool. He is a member of this House and has made what I consider to be a serious statement. If I made such a statement as that made by the hon. member for

South Oxford, I would do one of two things-I would either press the charge to the hilt, or I would do the other thing.


Donald Sutherland: How would you go about it?


John Patrick Molloy: How did these people go about it? They brought in all the assistance they desired; they even brought in political assistance. Now, I did not want to say that at first, but I say it now. They brought in veterinarians opposed to the Government of the day, opposed to me, and opposed to my chief. They had these men there. That animal was destroyed in the town of Rathwell, in the presence of perhaps two hundred persons, and a section of the lung was taken by Dr. McGil-vray and put into a glass jar. All this was done in the presence of these people, and the jar was afterwards sealed and expressed, the cost being defrayed by Dr. McGilvray, at his own expense. Would my hon. friend try to make me believe, if I were the owner of 240 hogs, and they were condemned for hog cholera, and I were convinced as a layman that they were not infected, that I would not have done exactly as those people did? I have no fault to find with those who acted in that way to me, except that I went out of my way to do something for them and they turned upon me like an adder. But it was proven to the hilt that I was right and they were wrong. I would do as they had done if I were convinced, as my hon. friend from South Oxford is certainly convinced by the statement of the owner and his son, that the animals were not diseased. Why did he stand by and allow them to be destroyed? The Government of Canada was responsible for what was done. They can be held responsible, and that is the ground on which I would have proceeded. There was one other case. In this case the horses reacted but 10 p.m. were not clinical and I left the animals in the possession of the owner, Mr. Walsh. When I was ordered back to make the re-test, the animals reacted and I destroyed them. That is the only man I dealt with, to whom I extended a kindness, who did not resent it afterwards so far as I was concerned. I will stake my reputation as a veterinarian, that the man who condemned the hogs, if he was a veterinarian employed by this Government, or by the former Government, knew his work, and carried out his orders and the chances are that the man who

owned the stock and the people in that neighbourhood have been benefited in consequence.


Donald Sutherland: It is quite evident, from my hon. friend's last remarks, that it would be futile to attempt to convince him, for the reason that he is convinced already, that the inspectors were right.


John Patrick Molloy: I convinced the other inspectors.


Donald Sutherland: I have no doubt the hon. member would exercise diplomacy and good sense in dealing with a case such as I have mentioned, but I think he will admit that there is a wide difference between a horse with glanders and a hog with cholera. There is no comparison between them; the conditions are not similar. The hon. member knows a great deal more about veterinary science than I do, and I think he will agree with me that when hog cholera breaks out in a herd there is not much doubt in the mind of the owner, or of anybody else, as to whether the disease exists or not. It does not require much time or insight to ascertain the fact; there is abundance of evidence to prove it. I pointed out that the owner's son had made an affidavit to the effect that the food was properly cooked, that there was no sick animal there, that none had died from the disease, and that hog cholera had not been found in the pens while he had been there for nearly a year and a half. That affidavit was forwarded to the department. Now, the hon. member for Provencher asks: why did he not prove this matter if he was in doubt? I may point out to him that the inspector valued these hogs and led the owner to believe that he would be compensated. He put a valuation on every animal slaughtered, and that information is in the hands of the Veterinary Inspector General to-day. The hogs were destroyed. It was impossible to get evidence. All the evidence available was the fact that he had dressed and disposed of hogs for food from this destroyed herd. The hon. member will agree that it Would be difficult for him under the circumstances to get evidence. The inspector told him: "We are going to kill every animal. Clean up as many as you can to-day, because I am going to shoot every hog on the premises to-morrow." And he did so. These thirty-three hogs were driven out of a number of different pens. I understand from practically every pen, with the exception of one, where there were some small common pigs, was cleaned out. He has given evidence to that effect and
expects that the Government will be reasonable before he takes steps. It will be readily understood that it is a difficult matter to collect compensation from a Government or from a department if they refuse, as they have done in this case, to consider the matter, simply brushing it aside.
When I spoke before I referred to the experience which we had a few years ago with some of these infallible inspectors. The evidence that was reported on that occasion demonstrated clearly to my mind not only that they are not infallible, but that some of them are not even reliable.
I do not say that is true of all of them.
I believe that the Veterinary Director General is as careful in connection with these matters as it is possible to be, but here again you have a system under which men are not selected because of their judgment or because they are diplomatic-they are selected at random by the Civil Service Commission, sitting here in Ottawa, who do not know whether or not a man is competent for that work. The man may pass the examination to which he is subjected, he may be a graduate of a veterinary school, but that does not mean that he is either a reliable person or one suitable to undertake the duties which will be entrusted to him. I do not know any of these inspectors. Many of them, I recognize, are suitable men and would perform their duties all right. I am not criticizing them. I know nothing good, bad or indifferent about these different inspectors who inspected these animals, but I repeat again that when the owner and when his son, a most estimable young man, made affidavits that no disease existed in the herd and that no animals had died, they were entitled to consideration. The inspector who examined these hogs made a valuation and allowed the owner to believe that he would be compensated. Therefore I say it is pretty high-handed work on the part of the department to act as it did, and for the minister to get up here and declare that he has the best system of inspection in the world, and that these inspectors are almost infallible and beyond reproach. There are two sides to every story, and, from my knowledge of the men on whose behalf I am speaking to-night, I affirm that they are just as responsible and just as reliable as any of the inspectors of the department, and that may be saying a good deal.


Mr. McGIBBON (Muskoka) :: Were the 33 hogs that were infected selected from the rest of the herd?


Donald Sutherland: Yes.


Peter McGibbon: And were the rest of the herd not condemned?


Donald Sutherland: They were all
condemned.


Peter McGibbon: Were
they all inspected?


Donald Sutherland: I presume they
were.


Peter McGibbon: You are
not sure?


Donald Sutherland: Well, the whole
herd was condemned. Every hog on ^he premises, and some for which compensation was sought were the best finished that this farmer had. The owner did not take the hogs out of the pens; they were driven out by the inspector. The owner stood outside and pointed out to the inspector the ones he thought were fit for the market.


Peter McGibbon: They had been condemned previously?


Donald Sutherland: Yes, sir.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I was very much interested to hear what the hon. member for Provencher (Mr. Molloy) had to say in regard to his experience with glanders. Any veterinarian who has done a certain amount of service under the Health of Animals Branch has had the same experience over and over again. Therefore it may be interesting for him and the rest of the committee to know that the Health of Animals Branch, which is praised by hon. gentlemen on one side of the House and abused by hon. gentlemen on the other, has reduced the amount of compensation paid for glanders from $147,851 in 1905 to $6,000 in 1921.
With regard to the hog cholera situation and the facts in this particular case, I may say that when hog cholera appears in a herd it will very often show itself only slightly at the beginning. The first case will be indicated perhaps by a hog refusing to eat. Some morning when the rest of the hogs are busy he is inclined to lie down and hide away in some other part of the pen. There is a condition of feverishness and there is a slight discharge from the eye, which perhaps would not be noticeable to the ordinary layman feeding those hogs. Afterwards the infected hog may show a little wavering in his walk owing to weakness in the hind quarters. Then possibly acute symptoms develop, with redness on the abdomen and the back of the ears. These symptoms are familiar

to veterinarians. As the disease progresses you might get a lot of acute cases, and very often a week or ten days, or sometimes less, will make a very big difference in a herd where the infection has just been introduced.
With regard to our veterinary system, I have not said that the inspectors were infallible. What I did say, and what I repeat, without fear of contradiction, is that we have one of the best qualified veterinary services to be found in any country in the world, and to prove it I have only to say that we have less contagious disease in Canada than in any other country on the globe that I know of; and on that one ground alone if there is one country Which is entitled to ship cattle to Great Britain it is the Dominion of Canada. Our inspectors are not selected at random. First of all, every inspector has to be a graduate of a recognized veterinary college. In the second place, he has to pass a special examination, a professional examination, before he is appointed at all, and finally the appointment, under the system which now prevails, is made by the Civil Service Commission. These men are experts in their particular line. I worked fourteen years in this profession. I was chief inspector for British Columbia for that length of time, handled hundreds of cases of hog cholera and am fairly familiar with the details. Hence, I consider myself fairly efficient to form a judgment in such matters, as compared with the average hog owner. These inspectors are fully qualified, and there is no object in their causing hogs to be destroyed that should not be destroyed. It is very much easier to go on to a man's premises and tell him that he has a clean bill of health than it is to destroy his hogs.
It is a very interesting story that the hon. member (Mr. Sutherland) has told to-night-very interesting indeed. I have heard it time and time again west of the Rocky Mountains. I have heard men frequently say: "There is nothing wrong with my hogs but look out for my neighbours." In this particular case had the work been done by a newly appointed veterinarian there might perhaps have been the least doubt, but as it happened the inspector was one of our very best men on this work, Dr. Hall, a man who has been in the service for twelve or thirteen years, and whose word I would take any day of the week before I would take that of a man who was not qualified and had not received the proper training of an inspector. How are we going to carry out the require-

ments of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act in this country if we cannot rely on our inspectors? How are we ever going to keep disease out of the country, and maintain the enviable position we now enjoy in regard to contagious disease, if we are going to turn down the statement of our experts and accept the word of the hog owner. The mere fact that only thirty-three out of two hundred and thirty-five hogs were found free from disease, is an indication that there certainly was hog cholera in that herd. The veterinary director general in his report states:
If prompt notification had been given, the loss would have been very materially reduced, and instead of finding over 200 hogs so badly diseased as to be a total loss and only 33 that could be saved, the figures would have been reversed and over 200 would have been saved and only 33 lost.
In regard to garbage feeding, it is recognized in every country and particularly in this country where we import pork from the United States to a considerable extent, that garbage is a dangerous feed to give to hogs. I had a very excellent opportunity to study this sort of feeding in British Columbia, where in the cities of Victoria, Vancouver, New Westminster and Nanaimo large numbers of Chinese were raising hogs on garbage feed. They had all sorts of ramshackle premises and very poor cooking plants. They did not cook the feed properly, and hog cholera was always present, with the result that the disease would scatter over the country and we had hog cholera all through the province. Then we introduced a system of feeding regulations and insisted on those men keeping their premises perfectly clean. I left that department in 1917 to become the representative of Victoria in this House, and at that time we had succeeded in compelling those Chinamen to keep their premises in such clean condition, and we maintained such a close watch on them, that for years British Columbia had been entirely free from hog cholera. The feeding of garbage to hogs is very dangerous except under careful regulations. We have in force certain rules under which this feeding is permitted. One of those rules is that all the garbage must be thoroughly cooked, the cooking being necessary to sterilize and make it perfectly safe for the hogs. In this particular case to which the hon. member for South Oxford has drawn attention, our inspectors found garbage not thoroughly cooked. While the owners of those hogs may be very respectable men, and I am willing to accept his word for it, yet we know that our inspectors are reliable men
who have been in the service for a long time, there is no reason to think they did not tell the truth, and until the opposite can be proved we are bound to accept their word. The owners of those hogs broke the rule not only in failing to cook the garbage thoroughly, but also in not reporting that the disease existed on their premises, and therefore they forfeited their right to compensation. All the thirty-three hogs were slaughtered under inspection. In the United States they have a double immunization test, introducing on one side of the hogs a serum which does not contain living germs, and on the other side injecting a virus from the blood which does contain germs. In that way, while these hogs might have passed inspection as hogs that had been doubly immunized, still the pork from those animals, if fed in an uncooked state, might convey hog cholera to hogs. Hog cholera is not a disease that is communicable to man. The carcases of those thirty-three hogs were passed by competent men of the department, and were therefore fit for food just the same as if they had passed through an ordinary abattoir. Had those two hundred and thirty-five hogs passed through an abattoir two hundred and two of them would have been condemned as affected with hog cholera, and thirty-three would have been passed as fit for food in the usual way. I feel the hon. member for South Oxford is very much interested in this case, and I was very glad to hear what he had to say in regard to it, but if we are not going to enforce these rules as to the feeding of garbage we are going to have hog cholera all over the country as we used to have in British Columbia. These cases are all passed on by qualified veterinarians of the department, and their reports are then submitted to the veterinary director general and carefully considered by him.
To give you an idea of the danger of uncooked garbage fed to hogs, a short time ago one of our inspectors, I think during last summer, happened in his ordinary rounds of inspection to visit premises where hogs were kept. Only the day before a young hog had been slightly hurt by other hogs in one of the pens and he had been placed in a temporary pen on the outside to give him a chance to recover. He had sufficiently recovered to be able to walk around, and was able to reach a place where garbage was unloaded and put in the boiling vat. At that particular point were some boards covered by some of this garbage in an uncooked state, and

the little pig was gnawing off what he could of this garbage. The inspector called the owner's attention to it and told him "You will have hog cholera in this pen within a certain number of days." On his return there a few days after, sure enough, he found this little hog dnfected. That shows how infectious the disease is if the rule regarding proper feeding is not strictly observed. Therefore if we are to carry out these regulations we must accept the verdict given by the reliable men whom we have appointed to see to their enforcement.


Mr. NESBITT:: I always understood
that whenever hogs were killed on account of hog cholera the owner received compensation, and I have been listening anxiously to know why the minister did not allow compensation in this case. I think the minister is perfectly right in insisting that garbage should be thoroughly cooked before being fed to hogs. That was one mistake made by the owners, the other was in not reporting the disease. As to this latter mistake, it is quite possible that they did not know the hogs were infected, and I would suggest to the minister that it is always wise not to be too strict in matters of this kind, where a man might have erred in ignorance. As an illustration, I may say that I had hog cholera among my own hogs. I knew there was something the matter with them, but I had no more idea than the babe unborn what was the real trouble. I sent for a veterinary, and he diagnosed the case as hog cholera, and immediately sent for an inspector. These hogs of mine were fed with nothing but the best of meal from my own grain and skim milk from my own dairy, and I could not account for the disease, neither could the inspector, nor the veterinary, because there was no hog cholera within fifty miles of us. The only cause we could suggest was that as the railway ran through the paddock these hogs frequented, perhaps some infection from a car of hogs being shipped through might have been washed down upon the track as it slanted into this paddock, and my hogs thus became diseased. In that case I was compensated by the Government-the late Conservative Government. A good many of my hogs from pens that were not quite adjacent to those containing the hogs that were infected when slaughtered showed no signs of cholera at all. I know these people myself, and I

think they are absolutely honest and decent. It is quite evident that they were ignorant of the existence of cholera among their hogs, and I would rather err on the side of clemency than on the side of strict regulation in this case. I rose merely to urge the minister to exercise a little clemency, because the man mention by my hon. friend from South Oxford is not able to stand the loss without some remuneration.


Peter McGibbon: I would just like to second the remarks of the hon. member for North Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt). I can quite conceive that it is not always possible for a farmer to diagnose cholera at an early stage, and in this case the owner should not be blamed for not reporting it. I quite agree that the minister must accept the advice of his scientific advisers, but when it comes to matters of adjustment, whether in this department or in connection with pensions or anything else, I do not think the final authority should be left to some official who is more or less independent of Parliament and independent of the people. We must take the humane view of it; we cannot stand by and see people ruined, even through their own fault-in this case, probably through ignorance. But it is strange-perhaps there is an explanation of it-that only thirty-three of these hogs were tested and that those thirty-three were found to be fit for the market. Why did they not inspect the rest of them? At least more-perhaps one hundred or one hundred and fifty-might have been found sufficiently free from disease to permit their being disposed of, thus reducing the loss. The fact is that this man has sustained a serious loss apparently through the neglect of an official, who should have determined whether these hogs were or were not fit for consumption. If they were fit for consumption, he should have been allowed to sell them; if they were not, the public should not have been allowed to buy them. I submit that in testing only thirty-three of these animals, selected promiscuously-all of which were found in fit condition-and in simply slaughtering the remainder without compensation to the owner or without determining whether they were in condition for the market, the inspectors have condemned themselves. I would not advise the minister to stand behind a record of that kind, especially if the Government is not going to compensate the owner for his loss. I agree with the member for North Oxford that the minister should take this

matter in his own hands, give it a little human consideration, and see whether it is possible that justice can be done.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The usual practice in
cleaning up a bunch of hogs affected with cholera is not to hold post mortems on those clinical cases in which the disease is easily discernible. In such cases the animals are destroyed; it is usual to pick out for careful post mortem only those animals which are apparently healthy, to destroy the hogs when lesions are found, and to allow those cases to pass-in which no disease is evident. No doubt this was the course followed by these men; it is the course followed by inspectors everywhere in dealing with outbreaks of hog cholera.


Peter McGibbon: May I ask the minister whether it actually was followed? The member for South Oxford says it was not. That is quite important.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I understand from the
Veterinary Director General that the usual course was followed. However, I will get further information.


Donald Sutherland: How many of
these animals were tested by the inspector?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What do you mean by
"tested"?


Donald Sutherland: Whatever test they apply.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There is no test. The animals are slaughtered and a post mortem held in those cases where there are no external symptoms of hog cholera. If you saw a hog waddling along the road with ears red and abdomen red, showing all the symptoms of hog cholera, it would be a waste of time to examine him. A post mortem is held only in those cases where no external symptoms are evident; where the hog appears from an ordinary physical examination to be healthy. Then, if on post mortem lesions of hog cholera are found, the, carcass is condemned, and if entirely free from disease, it is passed. The raising of hogs which are fed on garbage is a very profitable business, because city garbage can be furnished as food at comparatively small expense. Owing to the danger which accompanies the feeding of garbage we insist upon the regulations with regard to cooking, etc., and as the member for North Oxford has pointed out, when a license is taken out the owner agrees that no compensation shall be paid where outbreaks occur on garbage-feeding premises unless he can prove that the disease comes from
some source other than the garbage. He undertakes that before he gets a license to feed the garbage at all, and in this case, although he had reported the disease, and although the garbage was found to be thoroughly cooked, unless he could prove that the disease came from some other source, he would not be entitled to compensation.


Mr. TWEEDIE:: I wish to direct the attention of the minister to another matter in connection with the slaughter of animals in Alberta, near the city of Calgary. A large number of dairymen have establishments in the vicinity of the city, and recently some of their cattle have been found to be infected and have reacted to the tuberculin test. The result is, of course, that the cattle have been ordered to be slaughtered. Compensation is afforded to the owner at the rate of two-thirds of the value of the cattle, the owner bearing one-third of the loss. But the difficulty is that the Government has fixed arbitrarily the maximum compensation to be paid per animal; I think it is $80. The dairymen feel that that amount is not coommensurate with the loss they sustain when their animals are destroyed and they have sent a petition to the Government asking that the maximum compensation be increased to $120. In discussing the question of the embargo last week the minister fixed the value of dairy cattle at anywhere from $125 to $175 or $200. It will be seen, therefore, that $80 is no compensation to the dairyman for the loss of his cattle. Besides, in the destruction of his cattle the dairyman is deprived of his means of livelihood. Another difficulty arises; when the cattle are slaughtered, there is no one who has authority to make immediate settlement with the owner in order that he may have the necessary funds to buy other cattle to replace those which have been destroyed, and it is a matter of weeks, sometimes of months, before he receives the compensation to which he is entitled. That being the case, it is almost impossible for him to replace his herds immediately after the cattle are destroyed. The dairymen desire, therefore, besides the increase of the maximum to $120, that when cattle are slaughtered someone shall have authority to make settlement at once, and, furthermore, that the Government inaugurate some system under which destroyed dairy cattle can be replaced immediately from the Government herds within the provinces, the dairymen to pay a reasonable

price for the animals thus obtained. This matter has been before the Minister of Agriculture for some time, and I should like to have him state to-night, if he possibly can, whether or not the Government have arrived at any decision as to the stand they purpose taking in connection with the matter.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I have been giving a good deal of attention to this question of the slaughter of those cattle. I presume the hon. member is referring to cattle at Calgary.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: Yes.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Those cattle are being slaughtered under our arrangements with municipalities in cleaning up milk supplies to the cities. If cities will make it necessary for milk supplies to come from herds free of tuberculosis we will undertake to test herds supplying milk to those cities. We have now in Canada about a dozen cities, one of which is Ottawa, that have taken advantage of this offer to clean up their herds and ensure a healthy supply of milk. As regards valuation, our valuation for grade cows is $80 and for purebred cows $250, of which we pay two-thirds, or $53.33 for grade animals and $166.66 for pure-bred animals. In the United States only $50 is paid for grades as a maximum, and $100 for pure-bred cattle, so that we are more generous than they are to the south of the line. We also leave the carcass in the possession of the owner. The animal is slaughtered in an inspected abbatoir under the inspection of our meat inspection man, and it is treated there just the same as it would be in the case of any ordinary animal shipped to an abattoir for food purposes. In some cases the tubercule might be no larger than a pea or a walnut, perhaps isolated and in a calcareous condition, and in that case the carcass would be fit for food, so that in addition to the compensation of $53.33, the owner would receive the beef value. In addition to that the owner can dispose of the offal of any one of those animals to the abattoir. There is the hide and the head, and there are also various organs which, in a diseased animal are useful for fertilizing purposes. They are cooked up at a high temperature so that they are only fit for fertilizing purposes. The compensation we give is very favourable in comparison with that of other countries. At one time we allowed on grade animals compensation on a valuation of only $60, but this was increased to $80.

The great tendency in the cattle market is not towards an increase in price, but rather towards a reduction; from 1914 to the present date, there has been a decided falling off, and at present the department does not see its way clear to recommend that the amount of compensation be increased. What is a diseased cow worth once you know that she is diseased? You cannot sell her in the market according to law, and we do not purpose paying a full valuation for any animal of that kind. As regards prompt payment of compensation, the point taken by the hon. member is very good, and while recently there has been a little delay in issuing cheques for compensation, I have made arrangements only to-day whereby those cheques will be sent out as promptly as possible after animals are destroyed.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Have these animals to be pure-bred or grade in order that compensation be given? Can a man receive compensation for the ordinary common animal, which is neither a grade nor a purebred?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The common garden
variety of animal is also eligible for compensation under those conditions.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: Has the department considered making arrangements whereby animals that are slaughtered can be replaced promptly from Government herds within the province?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No arrangements are
made along those lines. That is a matter that could very nicely be taken up by the provincial Department of Agriculture.


Donald Sutherland: Before leaving
this item, which is a very considerable one, and which shows a big increase, I should like to have a moment or two to refer to some of the arguments advanced by the minister why no compensation should be paid in the case to which I have referred. He says that these men have placed themselves outside of the class of those who ought to be compensated because the garbage was not properly cooked, and also because they had not reported the disease. I think he gave us the names of two inspectors who are very competent men. In looking over some of these papers, I came across an affidavit made by the son of this man, and it reads in part as follows:
I, Alfred E. Alderson, of the township of Etobicoke in the county of York, do solemnly declare that I am the manager of the piggery owned by George B. Alderson in the township

ol Etobicoke aforesaid and have held the same position since the first day of May, 1919.
That during the whole period of my employment as aforesaid all garbage fed to the hogs ir. the said piggery has been properly and efficiently cooked.
That from the said first day of May, 1919, until the destruction of the above-mentioned hogs by the Government inspector, all of the hcgs in the said piggery were always in a healthy state and we never had in the piggery during that time a case of cholera.
That is a very clear statement to be made by the son, and yet that is not to be considered at all. The minister has referred to two inspectors whose word he is prepared to accept. I have here a statement signed by inspector T. H. Richards, who inspected the hogs and valued them, and it is not Mr. Hall, or the other inspector mentioned by the minister, who was there and examined those hogs and permitted the man to dress as many animals as he could in that day. Mr. Alderson states himself that he could very well have handled many more, but he had only the one day to do the work in, and with the help he had, 33 hogs were as many as they could attend to. I see by the Public Accounts that Mr. T. H. Richards is a Toronto inspector. I do not know whether he is a veterinary or lay inspector. It is possible he may be a veterinary inspector. In view, however, of the clear and definite statement made by the owner and toy his son that to their knowledge no disease existed amongst their herd, I do not think they should have been considered as having waived all rights for compensation. Knowing this young man as I have known him for many years when he was in business in the town of Ingersoll be-going to work at this place, I am satisfied that when he made an affidavit of that character, he believed absolutely every word he was saying.
Consequently, I say that it ought to be beneath the Government of this country to pass such an act as the Animal Contagious Diseases Act-no, it is not the Act, but the regulations that have been drafted, and which he was compelled to sign, and waive all rights unless he could establish that disease had come into his herd from some outside source. It is absolutely impossible for him to establish that for he says there was not any disease. The inspectors say there was. There is a conflict of opinion, and it would be a very difficult thing to prove now that the hogs have been destroyed. The hogs were ordered to be destroyed and their carcasses to be deeply buried with lime. Mr. Alderson has waited for a considerable time in view of the statement made by Richards that he was
valuing these hogs. Mr. Richards did value them, and sent in to the department his valuation, showing that he was under the impression that Alderson was entitled to compensation. I think this is a matter that ought to receive a little more consideration from the minister than it has, and I think that if he realized the character of these men, and the positive statements they have made in this case, he would see that further consideration be given to it. It is a pretty serious matter to have that many head of hogs destroyed, with prices as high as they have been, and for the man to have his premises closed up. He was not permitted to continue business there, nor has he done so since that time. I trust the minister will see the seriousness of the position in which the man is placed.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I would like to add a word in support of the case made by the hon. member for South Oxford. I have read the letter of Mr. F. Torrance, Veterinary Director General, and it is quite clear to me that some subterfuge has been employed to deprive this man Alderson of compensation for his hogs. On the face of it, it is quite clear to me that the Veterinary Director General has strained a point to try and deprive the man of his right, and I think the minister would be well advised to look at the language the director general uses. In the first place, the director general's report takes two or three pages to deal with what the minister knew very well was the law. When you get down to the real facts, you can see the subterfuge that has been employed. He is attempting to beqloud the issue and deprive the man of compensation by specious language. That shows on the face of the report itself. I direct the minister's attention to the following :
Mr. Alderson's premises were visited from time to time and were found in a satisfactory condition until April 19, 1920, when Inspector Baker visited the premises and found several of his hogs showing signs of sickness.
No hog cholera, no suggestion of cholera.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That man was a lay inspector.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: It does not make any difference. Nobody in this report says the sickness is hog cholera. It goes on:
This officer who is a lay inspector in charge or the garbage feeding, took a temperature of one hog and found it was 105g. As Dr. O. Hall of this office was in the Toronto district at the time he proceeded to the premises with Inspector Baker and two or three other officers who were conducting accredited herd tests in

the district also accompanied Dr. Hall to the premises.
Then on page 4 of the report I find this:
Dr. Hall slaughtered the hog which Inspector Baker suspected was affected with hog Cholera.
It does not say the inspector suggested it was hog cholera. Inspector Baker does not say that himself. Neither does the director general. Inspector Baker reported that a number of hogs on the premises were showing symptoms of illness and the director general turns that into hog cholera without any authority, without any mandate, if one may use the term, without any foundation in any report that anybody had made up to that time. No report had been made that it was hog cholera, according to this very report of the director general. It goes on:
As Dr. Hall had to attend to other work Inspector Richards took charge of the case.
He is the third man.
He corroborated Inspector Baker's report that a number of hogs on the premises were showing symptons of illness.
Nothing about hog cholera yet.
Out of 245 hogs, which were slaughtered, there were only 33 of these hogs fit for pork, and a license was issued permitting the owner to dispose of the carcasses of these animals.
Who ascertained that? There is no report of that on record. The director general says so, but he has not the word of Hall, Richards or Baker for it, that any inspection was made. It-was just the statement of the director general.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: This information is
reported to the office on regular forms. It will be on file in the office.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: But the director general does not say so on his report. So far as this report shows, it may be only hearsay evidence of the three inspectors. The report goes on:
Mr. Alderson at the time of Inspector Hall's visit took the attitude that he did not know there were any hogs sick. As, however, Dr. Hall found so many of them exhibiting symptons-
Of what? Exhibiting symptoms of illness.
-he questioned the owner, and finally was informed that a few hogs had died a short time previous.
This is absolutely denied. The issue is clear between what Dr. Torrance says the inspector was told, and what the man himself says. There is direct evidence in the one case, and indirect evidence in the other. What was alleged is denied. Now it does seem to me that the position taken by the

hon. member for South Oxford in a case like this, which is not well made out by the director general's 'report, ought to be considered by the minister in the light of the subject as against the state. Here is a man who has lost $7,000 or $8,000, if I figure it correctly,-a man who has been in the business for many years, against whom there has been no previous complaint, and of whom this very report says that up to the 19th of April his premises had been from time to time inspected and everything was well ordered, kept in good condition. There was nothing slovenly; the man was not careless, but was one of the best men feeding hogs on the garbage system. Now a man of that class, who is careful, who is reputable, who has suffered a severe loss, surely has the right to appeal to the highest court open to him, the court of Parliament, against an extraordinary and drastic remedy that Parliament has, and I suppose the appeal which the hon. member for South Oxford has made on behalf of a citizen of this country. The minister should not be bound hard and fast to the members of his staff, should not take for granted that every inspector under his jurisdiction is telling the truth and that everybody else is telling falsehoods. The least that can be done in a case like this, where the subject through no fault of his own has been deprived of the compensation that the law allows, is that he should be given a chance of having denials made on a more sound and substantial basis than I' find in this report. The least the minister can do, I think, is to consider that the man has been a great sufferer, and where the state exercises drastic remedies, as in a case like this, the least it can do through its responsible ministers is to say:	As the action of my
executive officers has been seriously challenged, and as the report of the director general has been made on hearsay, we will take this matter into consideration and have a thorough investigation made, take evidence on oath, and satisfy ourselves whether or not this young lad perjured himself, whether the man who suffered the loss perjured himself, or whether some of the officers of the department are trying to gain kudos from the minister in bolstering up a case that will not stand the light of investigation.


Donald Sutherland: There is a considerable increase in this item over previous years, and in view of the attitude of the minister in regard to the case I have brought before the department, and others that have been laid before him, to which

very little attention has been paid, I think we ought to know something more as to why we are voting an increase of $390,000, and where the money will be spent. I for one want to know whether men who are going to have such authority vested in them will go all over the country regardless of regulations passed by this House. Will those regulations be ovserved, or will there be substituted for them others framed by the officers in the various departments? I think we are somewhat too lax in this respect. I have in my pocket a letter I received in the mail last night in connection with a Bill put through last year, and there are no fewer than six pages of finely printed regulations passed by the department by virtue of a clause in the Act which gave the minister authority to make such regulations. These regulations have been passed by officers of the department, with the consent of the minister-not the present minister, but some of his predecessors-and I think that when a man suffers a loss of $7,000 or $8,000 he is entitled to a little more consideration than apparently this man is receiving. Now, before we increase the number of these inspectors-and it is quite apparent from the way in which they flocked around that part of the country that there was no dearth of inspection, at least judging from the report of the veterinary inspector general-in view . of the difficult conditions that face us just now, I think that $390,000 is a large additional sum to vote, and we are entitled to know just what it is to be used for. We should not be in any great hurry to declare it carried. I venture to say that nine out of ten of those hon. gentlemen who are shouting "carried" do not care a fig, and do not know a button, about what these inspectors are appointed for. My experience has been just as I have stated to-night, and I must say that I am anxious to have some more information as to what these inspectors will do since you are increasing the staff to such a great extent. I believe that we have at the present time in some of the packing houses in the country a number of men going around as inspectors who are doing absolutely nothing. I am sure that there are great temptations in the paths of some of these people, and that they are not doing their duty as they should. I say this, knowing something of the conditions that prevail in some of the stock yards of the country where inspectors are supposed to operate. Stock is going to these yards, and instead of being examined and slaughtered it is being taken out and sold for 68
food. My experience convinces me that your inspectors are not quite as infallible as we are led to believe, and instead of increasing their numbers and sending them all over the country into every place it is possible to send them, some of them now on the job ought to attend to their work a little better than they are doing, particularly in the big stock yards. It is well known to the provers that there is no difficulty in sending to those stock yards and there disposing of them, stock that ought to be condemned. I have not
11 p.m. so far heard an explanation from the minister for this increase of $390,000.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Mr. HAY:: I desire to say just a word
in connection with the matter brought up by the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland). I agree with him that this man should receive justice at the hands of the department. I am glad the hon. member brought this matter up, because this is clearly a case in which justice is due, anc we, as representatives of the people, should see that it is meted out and full investigation held. I understand that before the hogs in question had been slaughtered a promise had been made that the owner would be compensated, and now the department is seeking to evade responsibility in the matter and refusing to pay for the animals. I think this is unfair. They have practically put the man out of business and I feel that an injustice has been done. I should like to see a thorough investigation made of the whole case. I agree with the view of the hon. member who introduced this subject that we should look for justice to all classes of people. I do not conceive it to be the duty of the inspectors in the different departments to harry a man out of business in which he is lawfully engaged. I do not think it is their duty to do anything that would deprive him of compensation to which he is entitled. That could hardly be the intention of the Government in appointing these inspectors, and I would strongly urge upon the department the necessity for a full investigation into this case.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


William Stevens Fielding: Mr. Chairman, may I say-


Donald Sutherland: Mr. Chairman-


William Stevens Fielding: Pardon me; I did not
intend to speak on the item. I thought it was carried.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Donald Sutherland: Before the item
is carried, I think that my request for some explanation as to what is going to he done with this $390,000 of an increase is but a reasonable one. But the minister apparently does not regard it as worthy his attention. He simply sits there and is prepared to have some of his henchmen in the back benches and opposite, declare the matter carried. I think there are others in this House, however, who just as much right to be heard as those who loudly say "carried." The sum of $390,000 is a considerable item. I have seen some of our friends opposite trotting up and down the back stretches of the province of Ontario within the last few years, crying about the terrible injustice which the farmers of the country had been suffering. Yet they sit here to-night with their mouths shut and have not a word to say. Nor do they say a word on any occasion when any matter affecting the farmers comes up in this House. I suppose, as the hon. member for Maple Creek (Mr. Maharg), would say, they are exercising their political sagacity. Well, I have not been exercising political sagacity during all the time I have been here.


John Archibald Maharg: I rise to a point of order. I never made that statement which the hon. member attributes to me. What I said was that we had been credited, by some hon. members opposite, with exercising political sagacity.


Donald Sutherland: My recollection
of the hon. gentleman's statement is as I have stated. However, I will accept his correction. But it is rather remarkable, Mr. Chairman, that while these Estimates are under consideration-


Andrew Ross McMaster: I also rise to a point of order. I understand that we are discussing the item:
Health of animals, administration of the Animal Contagious Diseases, and Meat and Canned Foods Acts.
And I am quite unable to see what any reference to the political opinions or practices of the United Farmers has to do with that item. The item has been very thoroughly discussed and if there is to be further talk upon it I think it should be more relevant. I submit that with all respect, Mr. Chairman.


Donald Sutherland: I am not going to accept any responsibility for the density of the hon. member for Brome. I do not think it is necessary to show the connection between those members who are calling

"Carried, carried" and the item itself. There is, however, a direct connection because of the desire of these gentlemen to get away from this item without having the matter discussed, or without having any explanation from the minister. I think we are entitled to some further explanation other than we have yet received as to why there is an increase of $390,000. We are entitled to know what these men are going to do and whether the minister is going to accept their statements in preference to the statements of responsible citizens of this country. I have given the statements of reliable citizens from their affidavits to-night and yet you are not prepared to admit-


Georges Henri Boivin: Order. I must draw the attention of the hon. member to the rule that all remarks must be addressed to the Chair. It would be well if that rule were strictly adhered to.


Donald Sutherland: I bow to your
ruling, Mr. Chairman.


John Archibald Maharg: I desire to ask a question. It is quite evident from the remarks you are making-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Donald Sutherland: Address the Chair.


John Allister Currie: The hon. member is out
of Order.


John Archibald Maharg: The point is this, Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the hon. member if he is of the opinion that I am one of those who have been shouting "carried" tonight?


Donald Sutherland: It is not necessary for me to answer the question. I think it is evident from the direction in which a good many of the interjections originated.


John Archibald Maharg: I rise to a point of order again. I have never at any time to-night said "carried" to any one item.


John Allister Currie: That is not a point of order.


Donald Sutherland: The interjections
during this discussion have been somewhat significant and remarkable. I do not want to prolong this debate nor do I want to be unreasonable. I think that I have been both fair and reasonable in my presentation of the claim of this party who has suffered loss at the hands of these inspectors. I think that I have a perfect right to have some further information from the minister as to why there should be an in-

crease of $390,000 for the appointment of more inspectors in his department at the present time.
Mr. TOLMIE,:	For about two hours I
have been trying to tell the hon. member for South Oxford and other hon. members what we propose to do with the amount asked for, and I think nearly everybody has now got a fair idea of how the money is to be expended. With regard to this particular case I have no particular objection to reviewing it personally and looking into the matter. I do not want to do anything that is unfair but up to the present moment I must say, that having received a report from the Veterinary Director General and getting further information in conversation with him, I have not seen anything to indicate that this man complied with the law and that he is entitled to compensation. However, if the committee, or any particular member of it, so desires I shall be only too glad to go into the subject very carefully, and if there is reasonable ground for going any further I will do so.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the item carry?


Donald Sutherland: I have listened, I think, as patiently as any hon. member has done to the minister's statements with reference to the item before us, and I have not heard him give any explanation as to why there should be this large increase in connection with this branch of his department.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: My experience in this
House has not been as lengthy as that of the hon. member for South Oxford, and perhaps I have been unable to explain myself sufficiently but I have heard no objection from any other member in that particular regard.


Mr.   CHAIRMAN@: Shall the item carry?


Donald Sutherland: No, Mr. Chairman, before leaving the item I think we might well learn something about the men who are at present in the service of the government before we place the power in the hands of the minister to have a lot more inspectors appointed through the Civil Service Commission, without any well defined knowledge as to what their qualifications are. I notice in the Public Accounts that there are a great many of these men who are receiving, I shall not say very high salaries, but very good stipends, and a bonus>
is also given to most of them. I would like to know from the minister whether or not it is intended to have this bonus continued. The bonus was given a few years ago as a "war" bonus and a great
many of these men did not go to the war. The word "war" was afterwards omitted and the grant called a straight bonus. I now wonder if that bonus is going to be perpetuated, and I would therefore ask how much of this proposed expenditure is for bonus and how much for straight salary.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The bonus will end on the 31st, March and after that date these officers will be treated in the same way as other civil servants.


Donald Sutherland: Does the item provide for the payment of the bonus or does it not?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, Mr. Chairman, it
does not.


Donald Sutherland: It covers the
amount that is in the Estimates for the present year?	_


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes it does.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the item carry?


Donald Sutherland: I notice there have been payments made for hogs slaughtered in a great many other cases. I observe that payment has been made for hogs slaughtered in the case of W. Reid of Brampton and F. Staggs of Brockville, the amount being $3,256.56. What inspectors examined those hogs and how wide-spread was the disease? Was there more evidence of disease in those cases than there was in the other instance to which I have drawn attention? Could the minister give us any information as to the extent of the disease in the herds where these large amounts were paid?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I regret that I aril unable to give that information off-hand.


John Patrick Molloy: What	are the minimum
and maximum salaries of inspectors at the present time?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: $1,800 and $2,000.


John Patrick Molloy: The amount of $1,800
is the minimum?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, sir.


Donald Sutherland: How many of
these inspectors have been receiving bonuses?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: All of them.


Donald Sutherland: How many new
inspectors do you propose appointing under the increased vote?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I did not hear your question.


Donald Sutherland: I am not often accused of whispering in this House, and I think I spoke loud enough for any one not afflicted with ear trouble to gather the purport of my question. My request was to know how many inspectors you purpose-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Donald Sutherland: -how many inspectors the minister purposes to appoint under the vote he is asking for tonight.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There may be more inspectors appointed, and there may not be; it depends entirely on the amount of contagious disease that we have to deal with in the coming year. As to that, I have no information as to what may occur in the future.


Donald Sutherland: I see that a considerable item here is under the Meat and Canned Foods Act, and 1 also notice that the minister has a motion on the order paper-which I presume will become law before we leave here-in connection with the permanent manufacture of oleomargarine I would ask him if he is anticipating appointing a whole raft of inspectors to take charge of this work?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I am not proposing, Mr. Chairman, to appoint a whole raft of inspectors to take care of the manufacture of oleomargarine. That does not come under this Act except in regard to the inspection of margarine manufactured in the packing houses, and we already have a staff to take care of that particular work.


Donald Sutherland: In connection with the staff that you already have-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Donald Sutherland: -that the minister already has taking care of this particular work, I would like to know whether they make a special report to him as to the prices and the proportions of the ingredients that enter into the manufacture of this commodity by the packing houses. Is there absolute information furnished the minister by those inspectors as to these matters?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: These inspectors, and all inspectors of the Health of Animals and of the Meat Inspection branch, make reports from time to time as to exactly what they are doing. With regard to the manufacture of oleomargarine, no particular standard is laid down; it varies in different packing houses.


Donald Sutherland: Well, we are getting a little information that we did not have before, and it may be useful later on. Mr. Chairman, I have never yet in this House made any effort to unnecessarily prolong discussion; I think hon. members will give me credit for that at least. And I think I have been reasonable in asking for information in connection with this item to-night; but if the minister does not see fit to give an answer to what I consider is a perfectly reasonable request, I will have to adopt some other method, that is all.


An hon. MEMBER:: Come over here.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the item carry?


Donald Sutherland: Mr. Chairman, I do not propose letting the matter drop here. If it is the desire of the committee that the item should be adopted, well and good. I beg to move that this item be reduced by $390,000 and leave it exactly where it was last year.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the amendment carry? In my opinion the noes have it. I declare the amendment lost.


Donald Sutherland: I would like the vote to be counted.


Georges Henri Boivin: When I pronounced the words, "In my opinion the noes have it," five hon. members should have risen in their places in order to have the vote counted. As no hon. members did rise, the Chairman could not call for a vote. I declare the amendment lost and the motion carried.
Amendment (Mr. Sutherland) negatived.


William Stevens Fielding: I hope the minister does not desire to go further to-night. We on this side of the House have been giving him all the help we can. There is now only half an hour left of St. Patrick's day, and certainly my right hon. friend the Minister of Justice should not be kept here any later.
Progress reported.
On motion of the Right Hon. C. J. Doherty the House adjourned at 11.25 p.m.
Friday, March 18. 1921	.